History
  • No items yet
midpage
Byington v. Moore
70 Iowa 206
Iowa
1886
Check Treatment
BeoK, J.

I. We find no express authority conferred by statute upon the court to appoint an attorney to conduct prosecutions of this character. An attorney may be appointed to draw up an accusation against a member of the bar for criminal or unprofessional conduct, looking to his disbai-ment; (Code, § 219;) but it is probable that the court, in the exercise of its inherent authority, could require a member of the bar to discharge such duty. But the exercise of such authority rests in the sound discretion of the judge. The abstract before us fails to show any facts upon which we may find, or even infer, an abuse of such discretion, indeed, no facts are presented to us further than are alleged in the pleadings and motion. We are required rather to presume that the judge rightly exercised his discretion.

II. The cause, however, may be disposed of upon these grounds: The order of the court overruling the motion does not affect any substantial right of plaintiff in the proceedings, and “ does not determine the action, and prevent a j udgment from which an appeal may be takennor does the order “ involve the merits, and materially affect the final decision of the cause.” In the absence of these conditions, no appeal can be taken. Code, § 3161.

The plaintiff’s appeal will therefore be

Dismissed.

Case Details

Case Name: Byington v. Moore
Court Name: Supreme Court of Iowa
Date Published: Dec 8, 1886
Citation: 70 Iowa 206
Court Abbreviation: Iowa
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.