1 S.D. 290 | S.D. | 1890
This case, originally tried in justice court, was appealed to the district court of Beadle county, upon questions of both law and fact, and a new trial demanded. When tho case was reached and called upon the trial calendar of said
The first question — to-wit, the authority of the court to dismiss an appeal under such circumstances — was discussed and determined by this court in Myers v. Mitchell, 1 S. D. 249. It was there held that the court could not dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, except upon notice, as provided in Section (3136, Comp. Laws; that, the case being on the calendar to be tried anew, it was, under said section, subject to all the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure as to trials, and so the complaint, as in cases originally commenced in the district court, might be dismissed for non-prosecution, but the dismissal of the complaint and the dismissal of the appeal are radically different in substance and effect. The views of the court as therein expressed are equally applicable to this case, so far as this question is concerned, and decisive of it. The court erred in dismissing the appeal, and, the appeal having been dismissed in error, appellant was plainly entitled to have it reinstated without condition or payment of costs. The judgment of the district court is reversed, and the case remanded to be placed upon the calendar for trial.