From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sowers v. Shertzer

Supreme Court of Virginia. Richmond
Nov 21, 1938
171 Va. 426 (Va. 1938)

Opinion

Record No. 1977

November 21, 1938

Present, All the Justices

APPEAL AND ERROR — Dismissal — Failure to Assign Error — Failure to Make Concise Statement of Facts — Case at Bar. — In the instant case appellees moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that appellants in their petition made no assignments of error and made no concise statement of the facts, as required by section 6346 of the Code of 1936 and Rule II(b) of the Supreme Court of Appeals. The return date of the motion to dismiss, of which appellants were notified, was approximately two months before the expiration of the time within which appellants could have filed a proper petition for an appeal, but no proper petition was filed.

Held: That the appeal must be dismissed as having been improvidently awarded.

Appeal from a decree of the Circuit Court of Arlington county. Hon. Walter T. McCarthy, judge presiding.

Dismissed.

The opinion states the case.

Clyde B. Lanham, for the appellants.

Charles Henry Smith, for the appellees.


The record discloses that the appeal in this case was granted on January 20, 1938, and that a written motion to dismiss it was filed by the appellees on February 2, 1938. At the same time the appellants were notified that on the first day of March, 1938, the appellees would move the court to dismiss the appeal as having been improvidently awarded. The final decree appealed from was entered on October 27, 1937. Thus, it is disclosed that after the return day of the motion to dismiss the appeal there still remained approximately two of the six months allowed for an appeal within which the appellants could have, if they had been so advised, filed a proper petition for an appeal.

The grounds for the motion to dismiss are: First, that the appellants in their petition have made no assignments of error. Second, that they have made no concise statement of the facts in their petition.

Upon an inspection of the petition for appeal it is apparent that no assignments of error have been made and that no adequate statement of the facts is set forth. Under section 6346 of the Code it is provided that the petition for an appeal shall assign errors and in Rule II(b) of this court it is provided that an appellant must include in his petition for an appeal a concise and fair statement of the facts in the case, those which are controverted as well as those which are conceded.

It is perfectly patent in this case that the petition neither conforms to the statute nor to the rule of court in the respects mentioned. Notice of these material defects in the petition for appeal had been brought home to the appellants within ample time for them to have perfected their appeal by filing such a petition as is required by the statute and by the rule of court referred to. This they failed to do. It is accordingly our duty to dismiss the appeal as having been improvidently awarded. Oliver v. Commonwealth, 163 Va. 347, 175 S.E. 864.

Dismissed.


Summaries of

Sowers v. Shertzer

Supreme Court of Virginia. Richmond
Nov 21, 1938
171 Va. 426 (Va. 1938)
Case details for

Sowers v. Shertzer

Case Details

Full title:CLARENCE F. SOWERS, ADM'R, ETC. v. GRACE SHERTZER, EXECUTRIX, ETC

Court:Supreme Court of Virginia. Richmond

Date published: Nov 21, 1938

Citations

171 Va. 426 (Va. 1938)
199 S.E. 477

Citing Cases

Taylor v. Commonwealth

In any event, the petition is sufficient to meet the requirement of the rule, though the statement of facts…

Nicholas v. Commonwealth

That rule and section 6346 of the Code are clear and explicit, and those who undertake to proceed without…