Ingrim v. Epperson
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. John B. Moore, W. G. Dyas, and B. F. Howard, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
The superior court rendered its judgment in favor of the defendant Louise Clark in the above-entitled action, March 1,1901, and its judgment was entered of record on the same day. Notice thereof was served upon the plaintiff March 2, 1901. No notice of intention to move for a new trial was given, but on April 2d the plaintiff served upon the respondent a proposed statement on appeal. No order of court or stipulation of attorneys had been made extending the time for its service, and the respondent’s attorneys declined to accept service of the same. Thereafter—April 13th—the plaintiff served…
2Cited by32 opinions
- Security Truck Line v. City of MontereyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Riskin v. TowersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Alferitz v. CahenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Ross v. RossCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Anglo California Trust Co. v. KellyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.