Chappell v. Edmondson Avenue, Catonsville & Ellicott City Electric Railway Co.

Briscoe, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The motion to dismiss the appeal in this case must 'prevail. There are two grounds upon which the motion is ⁵¹³ based: ” First. Because an appeal does not lie from the order of the Circuit Court in a proceeding of this kind ; and second, because the record in the case has not been printed in accordance with the rules of this Court.

It appears from the record that the appellees, the Edmondson Avenue, Catonsville and Ellicott City Electric Railway Company, proceeded according to the provisions of the Act of 1892, chapter 335, to condemn certain lands of the appellants for railroad purposes as by such act it was authorized to do. A warrant was duly issued by a justice of the peace of Baltimore County, upon application of the company to condemn the land and assess the damages. An inquisition was had and returned by the sheriff to the Court. Thereupon the following proceedings were had, as appears from the "docket entries ” in the case.

"Novr. 19th, 1895—Exceptions filed. Same day motion to quash filed. “ Novr. 20th, 1895—Notice to plaintiff to produce copies filed. “ Same day sheriff’s return of service of order of Court on William L. Layfield, secretary of plaintiff “ Same day—Petition for a writ of certiorari refused ; exceptions noted. “ Same day—Application for removal refused; exceptions noted. “Novr. 21st, 1895—Additional exceptions filed. “ Novr. 22nd, 1895—Sheriff’s return of service of notice on counsel for plaintiff filed. “Novr. 23rd, 1895—Additional exceptions of defendants and exhibit plat filed. “ Novr. 25th, 1895—Motion to quash filed. Same day— Motion of plaintiff that the Court shall not receive papers filed by appellant after testimony closed filed. “Novr. 26th, 1895—Exceptions of Alcinda M. Chappell, &c., filed.” And on the 3rd of Dec., 1895, an order for appeal to this Court was filed in these words : ⁵¹⁴ ‘ ‘ Mr. Clerk : Enter an appeal in this case from the order of the Court passed November 18th, refusing to order the removal of this case, and from the order of the Court passed November 20th, 1895, refusing to issue a writ of certiorari herein, and the refusal of the Court to remove said case to the United States Circuit Court. Thomas C. Chappell, Atty. for Alcinda M. ChapfelL, Thomas C. Chappell, Thomas C. Chappell, Trustee.” Now, so far as the record discloses, there has been no order by the Circuit Court of Baltimore County, confirming the inquisition, nor an appeal from a final order, though the appellees in their brief state “that