Court Opinion

ID: 9833457
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:44:37.009257+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:03.232531
License: Public Domain

*717On Motion for Rehearing.
[5] We have carefully examined the motion of appellants for a rehearing, and believe no good reason is thehoin given for a change of the disposition heretofore made of the appeal. We take occasion, however, to state, in connection with that portion of our original opinion relating to the efforts made by appellants to secure a statement of facts, and in which it is said that the most appellants did, beyond requesting the preparation of the transcript of the testimony, was to write, a letter to the official stenographer on January 2S, 1SXLS, threatening to resort to mandamus proceedings against him unless such transcript was prepared and filed by the 10th day of February, 1918, and that this letter failed of results, it appears from a letter of the stenographer in reply to the letter referred to in the opinion, and which was attached to a motion made by appellants in this court to postpone the submission of the case and place it at the heel of the docket, that said stenographer stated to counsel for appellants that it would be impossible to file the transcript of the evidence by the 10th day of February, 1918, but that it would be filed not later than the 1st day of April, 1918. It also appears by the affidavit of appellants’ counsel attached to said motion for a postponement of. the submission of the case as stated that he relied upon said letter, and confidently believed that said transcript would be prepared and ready by April 1, 1918. It further appears from the affidavit of appellants' counsel that for some time prior to AiDril 1, 1918, said stenographer, with the approval of the trial court, was absent from the state engaged in private work. These matters were considered in rendering our original opinion, but they were not regarded either alone or together with the other -facts shown ás sufficient to warrant a reversal of the case, because appellants had failed to secure a statemtmt of facts.
Believing the appeal has been properly disposed of, the motion for rehearing is overruled.