Houghton v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
MANDAMUS from the Supreme Court to compel the Judge of the Superior Court of Riverside County to settle a hill of exceptions upon appeal from an order of said Court. J. S. Noyes, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
This is an application for a writ of mandate, directed to the judge of the above court, requiring him to settle and certify a hill of exceptions to he used on an appeal from an order made after judgment. The draft of the proposed hill was served in proper time, August 19, 1899. Some of the parties upon whom the proposed hill was served resided in San Francisco, where appellant’s counsel has his office; others resided at Riverside and in Los Angeles, and these were served by mail. The distance from San Francisco to Riverside is five hundred and forty-seven miles. The proposed hill consisted of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stonesifer v. KilburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by8 opinions
- McCarty v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Gay v. TorranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Buis v. Lindauer Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1931
- Parker v. BambergerUtah Supreme Court · 1941
- Ryer v. Rio Land & Improvement Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.