Sadicoff v. Jackson
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtConrey, P. J.
Defendant appeals from a judgment for $389.02, damages for wrongful conversion of personal property of the plaintiff. We have before -us the judgment-roll, without any bill of exceptions.
[1] No attempt is made by appellant to present any point on the merits of the case. He merely suggests that the findings of fact were served on his attorney on February 20, 1918, and were signed and filed on the 25th of that month, which he says was one day before expiration of the period of time prescribed by section 634 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and, therefore, claims that the judgment is “void.”
The…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Amundson v. ShaferCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rosland v. ConstantineauCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Manfre v. SharpCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Pruyn v. WatermanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Hammond Lumber Co. v. HenryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927