Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

Bow et al. v. State Highway Commission.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY DRURY, COMMISSIONER

Affirming.

Property belonging to Ellen Bow and eight others was taken for the construction of a highway, and Ellen Bow alone had appealed.

The statement of appeal filed reads, "Ellen Bow et al., Appellants," but such expressions as "et al.," "etc.," "and others," and "c.," are absolutely meaningless in a statement filed under section 739 of the Code of Civil Practice.

No exceptions had been filed to the report of the commissioners; therefore there was no issue made in the trial court and nothing to complain of here.

This concludes no one but Ellen Bow, as she is the only appellant.

Judgment affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BOW v. STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION
(Dec 16, 1932)