Fairbanks v. Lampkin
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Meudocino County taxing costs. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
This is an appeal from an order made after final judgment taxing' a cost bill, the whole amount of the bill being only $171.20.
We do not think that this court has jurisdiction of the appeal, for the reason that the amount involved is less than $300. We strongly intimated this conclusion in SellieJc v. Be Carlow, 95 Cal. 644; and further consideration satisfies us that the intimations given in the opinion in that case should be taken as a correct statement of the law on the subject.
Section 47, article VI. of the state constitution, provides that: “The supreme court shall have appellate…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sellick v. De CarlowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Schallert-Ganahl Lumber Co. v. NealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Oullahan v. MorrisseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Langan v. LanganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by15 opinions
- Perry v. QuackenbushCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Foley v. California Horseshoe Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Kelley v. MarronNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1915
- Southern California Railway Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Sierra Union Water & Mining Co. v. WolffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.