Carter v. Paige
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. The motion was made to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that the transcript had not been filed in time.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. The motion was made to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that the transcript had not been filed in time. The time to file the transcript expired April 14, 1888. The affidavits filed on behalf of appellant showed that the printing of the transcript was completed at Stockton April 12, 1888, and delivered to P. W. Bennett, Esq., of that place, who had promised to procure the certificate of respondent’s attorney, who resided in Stockton. Appellant’s attorney resided in Fresno, and was informed by letter of Mr. Bennett, dated April…
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
Rule 3 of this court provides simply that if a transcript be on file at the time the notice of motion was given, that fact shall be sufficient answer to the motion to dismiss; but it does not follow that no answer can be made at any subsequent time. The mere fact that the transcript is on file at the time the notice of motion was given is all the showing the appellant is required to make to defeat the motion to dismiss; but if the transcript be not filed until after the notice of motion has been given, something more is required. The filing of the transcript does not cure the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Welch v. KenneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
3Cited by11 opinions
- In Re Presentment to Superior CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1951
- Bourne v. RootCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Clinton v. ShawCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Ward v. HealyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Friend & Terry Lumber Co. v. DevineCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.