Legal Opinion

Headstrom v. Hellieson

California Supreme Court

Decided June 6, 1902No. S.F. No. 3026PublishedCited by 2 opinions

MOTION to dismiss appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County and from orders denying a motion to set aside the judgment and refusing to set aside a default. A. L. Rhodes, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

Respondents moved to dismiss the appeals of defendant upon the ground of the insufficiency of the undertakings filed to support them. Appellant sought to meet the motion by filing new undertakings approved by the chief justice of this court. While this motion to dismiss was under advisement, respondents made another motion to dismiss, based upon the provisions of subdivision 4 of rule 2 of this court, for failure of appellant to file his points and authorities within thirty days after the filing of the transcript. It is admitted that the points and authorities were not filed, but appellant…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Shain v. People's Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
  2. White v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Wood v. MesmerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
  2. Ryan v. SnyderWyoming Supreme Court · 1921

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API