Dernham v. Bagley
California Supreme Court
MOTION to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. John A. ITosmer, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, J.
This is a motion to dismiss an appeal' taken by plaintiff from so much of the judgment given in the above-entitled cause as was in favor of the defendant. The ground of the motion is that plaintiff has not served and filed the printed-transcript of the record on appeal within the time prescribed by rule II of this court. (144 Cal. xl, [78 Pac. vii].)
Several interesting questions have been ably argued by respective counsel, but we find it necessary to consider only one matter in disposing of the motion.
The appeal was duly perfected on April 2, 1906. At the time of the service and filing of the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Stonesifer v. KilburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Banta v. SillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Henry v. MerguireCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Moultrie v. TarpioCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- King v. DuganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Curtin v. IngleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Union Collection Co. v. OliverCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
- Love v. CaylorSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- Squires v. Mergenthaler Linotype Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1940
- Brown v. CobbCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.