Court Opinion

ID: 9571646
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:33:50.138398+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:30:45.100873
License: Public Domain

The following opinion was filed May 2, 1950:
Broadfoot, J.
(on motion for rehearing). The state contends that the decision as rendered requires proof of municipal ordinances in proceedings in municipal court where the court is authorized by statute to take judicial notice of such ordinances. Perhaps the language in the opinion was not the most apt, but we believe the thought conveyed was that matters of which the trial court may take judicial notice should be offered in evidence or otherwise made a part of the record. By proving the ordinance it would become a part of the record. However, there are other methods. We will sug*548bgest only one. In matters where the trial court may take judicial notice of an ordinance he can make a finding indicating that he has taken judicial notice of said ordinance, and he can indicate in his finding sufficient of the substance of the ordinance so that the record may be understandable and intelligible to the appellate court. This additional statement should clarify the decision.
By the Court. — The motion for rehearing is denied without costs.