Baldwin v. Kramer
A. R. BALDWIN and J. H. POLLARD v. WILLIAM KRAMER
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Heydeneeldt (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Heydeneeldt
Heydeneeldt, Justice, delivered the opinion of the Court; with which Murray, Chief Justice, concurred.
This was an appeal from an order granting a new trial. The judgment was rendered in May, and the new trial granted at a subsequent term in September.
We hold, that after the expiration of a term of the District Court, no power remains in it to set aside a judgment, or grant a new trial. A different doctrine would lead to great uncertainty, and pojsibly to gross abuse. There must be a time when the rights of the parties are to be considered as determined, and for litigation to cease; and for this purpose the law has wisely fixed the rule here indicated.
Let the order be reversed with costs.
Cited by
- People v. McAllister Crim. 4266 · 1940-05-27
- Kaufman v. Shain No. 16006 · 1896-01-14
- Brackett v. Banegas No. 19123 · 1893-10-07
- Norton v. Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fé Railroad No. 14614 · 1893-02-25
- Wiggin v. Superior Court No. 11230 · 1886-01-27
- Casement v. Ringgold · 1865-07-15
- Castro v. Richardson · 1864-07-01
- Bell v. Thompson · 1862-07-01
- Carpentier v. Hart · 1855-07-01
- Lurvey v. Wells · 1854-01-15