Legal Opinion
King v. Wilson
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 20, 1950No. Civ. 18134PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWhite, P. J.
Respondents moved to dismiss the within appeal on the ground that the notice of appeal was not filed within the time required by rules 2 and 3 of Rules on Appeal. At the initial hearing of the motion appellant appeared in person and stated that she was without counsel, whereupon this court ordered the matter continued that appellant might be represented by counsel. Thereafter appellant’s present counsel, Mr. J errell Babb, filed an answer to the notice of motion, as well as affidavits in opposition; counteraffidavits were filed, and the matter was argued and submitted.
The judgment was entered…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Jablon v. HennebergerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- In Re Estate of NuttCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Mellin v. TrousdellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Whiting-Mead Commercial Co. v. Bayside Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1918
- Berman v. Blankenship MotorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Douglas v. JanisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- Kientz v. HarrisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- National Advertising Co. v. City of Rohnert ParkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Estate of King v. KingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Bryant v. Los Angeles Transit LinesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.