State ex rel. Brown v. City of Pierre

Citations

• 15 S.D. 559
• 90 N.W. 1047
• 1902 S.D. LEXIS 53

Syllabus

<p>1. Under Code, § 4914, requiring an answer to contain a general or specific denial of each controverted material allegation of the complaint, and a statement of any new matter of defense or counterclaim, an answer denying every allegation of the complaint not specifically denied, admitted, or explained, and then specifically denying, admitting, or explaining certain allegations, was sufficient to generally deny all allegations not mentioned or referred to.</p> <p>2. Where it had been shown that a petition of property owners for an extension of the city limits had been filed with the city clerk and ordered published, a printed copy thereof, identified by the one who prepared the original, was admissible to prove the contents of the original, which had been lost.</p> <p>3. Entries upon the records of the city clerk to the effect that a petition of property owners had been considered, and that the extension asked for had been granted, were sufficient to show that such a petition had once existed.</p> <p>4. Where a property owner had signed a petition for an extension of the city limits so as to include her property, and had paid taxes to the city on such property for three years, she was estopped from bringing an action to vacate the proceeding taken by the city council eight years before, making such extension, which, if successful, would result in great injustice to other property owners; she having been guilty of laches in asserting her rights.</p> <p>5. The question as to the sufficiency of the evidence to support findings cannot be considered on appeal, where neither the record nor assignment of errors specified particular objections.</p> <p>6. Where the notice of appeal in.the abstract does not show that the appeal was taken from the order denying a new trial, the evidence cannot he reviewed.</p>