Legal Opinion

Murphy v. Stelling

California Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 1903No. S.F. No. 3189PublishedCited by 16 opinions

MOTION to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County denying a motion for relief, under section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure. M. H. Hyland, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.

This is a motion to dismiss defendant’s appeal from an order of the superior court denying his motion for relief on the ground of surprise, accident, etc., under section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The ease is this: After judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant gave notice of a motion for a new trial, to be based upon a statement of the case. In due time a draft of a proposed statement was served, to^ which amendments were proposed by plaintiff. Defendant refused to adopt the amendments, and applied to the court to settle the statement. When the matter came on for hearing, plaintiff…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Stonesifer v. KilburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Banta v. SillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Kaltschmidt v. WeberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Hudson v. HudsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  5. Landers v. LandersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Wood v. Peterson Farms Co.California Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Brode v. GoslinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Commercial National Bank v. SchlitzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
  4. Miller v. American Central InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
  5. W. J. Somers Co. v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API