From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Supply Co. v. Teton Auto Co.

Supreme Court of Wyoming
Oct 5, 1931
43 Wyo. 349 (Wyo. 1931)

Opinion

No. 1717

October 5, 1931

APPEAL from the District Court, Fremont County; EDGAR H. FOURT, Judge.

There was a brief by George H. Paul, of Riverton, Wyoming, in support of the motion and in resistance to the motion there was an affidavit by O.N. Gibson, of Riverton, Wyoming.


The time for appellant to serve and file its brief expired August 8. The brief was served on opposing counsel August 11, and filed August 13. Respondent's motion to dismiss on the ground that the brief was not served and filed within the time allowed by rule must be sustained. Rule 21, 42 Wyo. 536.

Appellant has filed an affidavit showing that as the result of an error in calculation it was thought that the time for serving and filing the brief did not expire until August 13. We cannot hold that this mistake would justify a suspension of the rule. See, Cronkhite v. Bothwell, 3 Wyo. 739, 31 P. 400; Ford v. Townsend, 22 Wyo. 397, 143 P. 356, and cases cited.

Dismissed.


Summaries of

Supply Co. v. Teton Auto Co.

Supreme Court of Wyoming
Oct 5, 1931
43 Wyo. 349 (Wyo. 1931)
Case details for

Supply Co. v. Teton Auto Co.

Case Details

Full title:LAWER AUTO SUPPLY CO. v. TETON AUTO CO

Court:Supreme Court of Wyoming

Date published: Oct 5, 1931

Citations

43 Wyo. 349 (Wyo. 1931)
5 P.2d 306

Citing Cases

Starley v. Wilde

The only question here presented is whether appellants have shown sufficient justification for failure to…

Stanolind Oil Co. v. Bunce

The excuses offered by plaintiffs in error fall far short of showing any such "unavoidable casualty" or…