
    George Wambach, Guardian, Appellee, v. Grand Lodge of Iowa Legion of Honor, Appellant.
    Appeal: time op taking: record: dismissal. Where the abstract showed that the cause went to trial moré than ten months prior to the taking of the appeal, and that at the conclusion of the evidence the cause was taken from the jury and judgment entered for the plaintiff, and there was no other showing as to the date of the rendition of the judgment appealed from, held, that the appeal was taken too late, and must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction to entertain it.
    
      Appeal from Ramillón District Court. — Hon. J. L. Stevens, Judge.
    Friday, May 19, 1893.
    Action on a beneficiary certificate. Judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed.
    
    Dismissed.
    
      J. L. Kamrar and A. St. Clair Smith, for appellant.
    
      Wesley Martin and Geo. Wambach, for appellee.
   Granger, J.

It is suggested by the appellee that the abstract is an affirmative showing that the court is without jurisdiction. An appeal must betaken “within six months from the rendition of the judgment or order appealed from; not afterwards.” Code, section 3173. Time, in taking an appeal, is a jurisdictional fact. It must affirmatively appear. Where the jurisdictional facts do not appear, the appeal, must be dismissed. Plummer v. People’s Nat. Bank, 74 Iowa, 731. Appearance does not cure the defect. State ex rel. v. Clossner, 84 Iowa, 401, and authorities there cited. The abstract shows that upon the filing of the answer, February 9, 1891, “this action came on for trial to a jury,” etc. At the conclusion of the evidence the court sustained a motion to take the case from the jury, and enter judgment for the plaintiff. This is the only showing in the abstract as to the date of the judgment. The abstract then shows that “on the-fifteenth day of December, 1891, the defendant appealed to this court, by serving notice,” etc. It thus appears from the abstract that the appeal was taken some ten months after the judgment or order appealed from. We are in such a case entirely without jurisdiction. Of our own motion, we are required, before-trial, to “see to it” that a case is one of which we have-jurisdiction. Plummer v. Bank, supra.

The appeal must be, and is, dismissed.  