Legal Opinion

Murphy v. Krumm

California Supreme Court

Decided April 12, 1943No. L. A. No. 18481PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.

— This is a motion by plaintiffs to dismiss the appeal of defendants because of the latter’s failure to present their record on appeal within the time required by law.

The following chronology of events is material to the consideration of this motion: On June 23, 1941, the judgment in question was rendered and from the respective adverse portions thereof plaintiffs and defendants took separate appeals. On August 18, 1941, the parties stipulated that both appeals might be heard on a single transcript and “that each appellant will pay his own filing fee in the Court of Appeal.” On October 3,…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Helbush v. HelbushCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  2. McCabe v. HealeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Shain v. People's Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Brooks v. Union Trust & Realty Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Toth v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Lundy v. LakinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  2. Caldwell v. HarveyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  3. Whelpton v. TaylorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  4. Heatly v. HeatlyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  5. Strong v. MacKCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API