Berniaud v. Beecher
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Joaquin County, and from an order refusing a new trial. Motion to dismiss appeal.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Joaquin County, and from an order refusing a new trial. Motion to dismiss appeal. The notice of the appeal in question, and the undertaking referred to in the opinion, were filed on the 31st of August, 1887. After discovering the defect in the undertaking, on the 9th of November, 1887, the appellant executed another undertaking on the appeal from the order refusing a new trial, and after its approval by one of the justices of the supreme court, he filed the same in that court. The further facts are->stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
Motion to dismiss appeal from an order denying a new trial.
In this cause there is a notice of appeal from the judgment, and from the order denying a motion for a new trial.
In the undertaking on appeal there is no recital that an appeal has been taken from the order. The undertaking only states that an appeal from the judgment has been taken.
The motion to dismiss the appeal from the order is made on the ground that the appeal is not recited in the undertaking on appeal, and therefore the undertaking is not sufficient.
In our judgment the undertaking is insufficient. Though we have…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Magee v. WhitacreNevada Supreme Court · 1939
- Schurtz v. RomerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Cook v. Oregon Short Line & Utah Northern Railway Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1891
- Forni v. YoellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Hurley v. O'NeillMontana Supreme Court · 1900