Descalso v. Duane
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from Superior Court, City and County of San Francisco; John F. Finn, Judge. Action by P. C. Desealso against John Duane. Order denying and dismissing motion for new trial. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.
1Opinion of the Court
TEMPLE, C.
This appeal is from an order somewhat in consistent in its terms, denying and dismissing a motion for a new trial. To deny a motion is to entertain and act upon it, and at the same time to end it, when, of course, it cannot be dismissed. A dismissal is a refusal to entertain it. The two forms were adopted because the decisions of this court have caused some doubt as to what is the proper remedy in case the moving party fails to prosecute his motion with reasonable diligence. In Quivey v. Gambert, 32 Cal. 305, it was held that an order dismissing a motion for a new trial, or striking *894…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Herrlich v. McDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Calderwood v. PeyserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Chase v. EvoyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- McDonald v. McConkeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smith v. American Falls Canal & Power Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1908
- Behrensmeyer v. GwinnIdaho Supreme Court · 1913