People v. Alameda Turnpike Road Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Third Judicial District, Santa Clara County. The defendant recovered judgment in the Court below, and the plaintiff appealed. The other facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Currey, C. J.:
When this case" was called for argument the defendant’s counsel presented to the Court exceptions, to the effect that no proper evidence of the service of notice of appeal appears in the transcript, which exceptions were duly taken and filed in accordance with a rule of the Court.
The notice of appeal contained in the transcript is in due form, but the evidence that a copy of such notice was served *183on the attorneys for the defendant is an affidavit which purports to have been annexed to the notice filed, in the following words and figures:
“ State of California, ) „…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Smith & Hoe v. AckerCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1840
- Buffendeau v. EdmondsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Franklin v. ReinerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- Beebe v. PaddockNew York Supreme Court · 1800
3Cited by8 opinions
- Harris v. Minnesota Investment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1928
- Hankla v. Governing BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- Reed v. AllisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Moore v. BesseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
- Hogs Back Consolidated Mining Co. v. New Basil Consolidated Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1883
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.