History
  • No items yet
midpage
Vansickle v. Haines
8 Nev. 164
Nev.
1873
Check Treatment

By the Court,

Whitman, C. J.:

In the original case entitled as above, the district court was directed to enter decree for respondents. Vansickle v. Haines et als., 7 Nev. 249. It appeared from the opening statement of counsel that the mandate had been strictly obeyed; consequently no further argument was allowed, *165upon the ground that the case was finally disposed of and that to hear an appeal would be to review the action of this and not of the district court — an unheard-of practice, except upon a rehearing granted, in which case the final judgment is stayed. Such is the uniform holding of courts of last resort. Chickering v. Failes, 29 Ill. 294; Cumberland Coal and Iron Co. v. Sherman et al., 20 Md. 117; Miner v. Medbury, 7 Wis. 100; Fortenbery v. Frazier et al., 5 Ark. 200.

The appeal is dismissed.

Case Details

Case Name: Vansickle v. Haines
Court Name: Nevada Supreme Court
Date Published: Jan 15, 1873
Citation: 8 Nev. 164
Court Abbreviation: Nev.
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.
    Vansickle v. Haines, 8 Nev. 164