Legal Opinion

Richardson v. City of Eureka

California Supreme Court

Decided November 25, 1891No. 14475PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Motion to dismiss an appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.

Respondent moves to dismiss the appeal herein from the judgment and order denying a new trial, upon the ground that appellant has not furnished this court with a transcript containing a copy of the judgment roll in said cause, as required by sections 661 and 952 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Respondent further insists that the appeal from the order denying the motion for a new trial should be dismissed upon the grounds that,—1. The transcript on ap-peal shows that appellant did not file with the clerk or serve any notice of his intention to move for a new trial in said cause; 2. That the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pico v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Paige v. RoedingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Buessel v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1919
  2. Richardson v. City of EurekaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Nye v. Marysville & Yuba Street RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API