Adams v. Dohrmann
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The statement on the motion for a new trial was agreed to by the counsel for the respective parties, and used on the hearing of the motion, but was not certified by the judge.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and from an order refusing a new trial. The statement on the motion for a new trial was agreed to by the counsel for the respective parties, and used on the hearing of the motion, but was not certified by the judge. Pending the appeal, the judge certified the statement nunc pro tune as of a day anterior to the hearing of the motion, and by order of the court below the statement was refiled nunc pro tuna as of the same day. The counsel for the appellants thereupon moved to amend the transcript in this court…
1Opinion of the CourtMcKee, J.
The appeal in hand is from the final judgment in this case, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial.
The notice of intention to move for a new trial designated that the motion Avould be made “on a statement of the case, and on the papers and records in the cause.”
In the transcript there is a paper marked, “ defendant’s proposed statement on motion for a new trial and on appeal,” which appears to have been filed April 10, 1880; but it Avas not, at any time, signed by the judge of the court, nor certified by him to the effect that it had been settled and allowed as was required by…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Keller v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Schreiber v. WhitneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
3Cited by14 opinions
- Superior Court v. County of MendocinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- People v. RuefCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
- Nuckolls v. Bank of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
- Simonton v. Los Angeles Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Niles v. EdwardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.