Opinion
No. 51753.
June 30, 1965.
DISMISSAL AND NONSUIT: Motion for continuance filed and heard 1 during term following dismissal term. Where the case, concerning application of rule 215, R.C.P., and whether trial court could hear and rule on a continuance during the term after the dismissal term, cannot be factually distinguished from a prior decision of this court the rule of stare decisis et non quieta movere requires an affirmance. See Anderson v. National By-Products, Inc., 257 Iowa 921, 135 N.W.2d 602.
APPEAL AND ERROR: Record — printing costs — one half of costs
taxed to successful party.
LARSON, J., dissents.
Appeal from Winneshiek District Court — G.B. RICHTER, Judge.
The trial court granted plaintiff's motion for continuance and denied defendants' motion to dismiss under rule 215.1, Rules of Civil Procedure. We granted leave to appeal. — Affirmed.
Miller, Pearson Gloe, of Decorah, for appellants.
Hart Hart, of Elkader, for appellee.
[1] This case cannot be factually distinguished from Anderson v. National By-Products, Inc., 257 Iowa 921, 135 N.W.2d 602. The rule of stare decisis et non quieta movere requires an affirmance.
[2] We find merit in the appellants' motion to assess a part of the costs of printing the record against the appellee. The record is unnecessarily long. We find much immaterial matter was inserted at the demand of the appellee. One half of the cost of the printed record will be taxed against the plaintiff-appellee. All remaining costs will be taxed against the defendants-appellants. The case is in all other respects affirmed. — Affirmed.
All JUSTICES concur except LARSON, J., who dissents.