The plaintiff, Helen C. Garberson, dismissed her suit for separate maintenance against her husband, John Howard Garberson, by filing a written dismissal of the suit with prejudice and at her costs in the district court of Wood-bury County where the suit was pending. Thereafter, William P. ■Welch and Carlos W. Goltz filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s ruling on an application for temporary support, suit money and attorney fees. The ruling was to the effect that *714 tbe court bad lost jurisdiction- — by virtue of the dismissal — to make any order with respect to temporary support, suit money, ■or attorney fees.
The notice of appeal states: “The parties taking the appeal are "William P. Welch and Carlos W. Goltz, attorneys at law, who have heretofore appeared for the above named plaintiff.’1
The defendant, John Howard Garberson, filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground’ that William P. Welch and Carlos W. Goltz are not parties to the case and cannot appeal. The motion must be sustained. The proposition that only a party to the record can appeal is too plain for extended argument. In Phillips v. Shelton,
“Moore was not a party to this proceeding either as plaintiff or defendant. Nor had he ever asked to be made a party thereto. * * * Until he was thus made a party he was in no manner liable for costs, nor could he interfere with rights of the original parties.”
In Ferguson v. Board of Supervisors,
To the same effect see Lorber v. Connor,
The appeal is dismissed.