Stonesifer v. Kilburn
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County refusing to settle a bill of exceptions. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Vanclief, C.
On June 13, 1889, judgment was entered in this case in favor of three of the defendants, and against the plaintiffs and two of the defendants.
The parties in whose favor the judgment was given notified the other parties of the decision on the seventeenth day of June, 1889.
On June 24, 1889, the plaintiffs and the two defendants against whom judgment was given (all of whom are appellants) gave due notice of their intention to move for a new trial on various grounds, and that the motion would be made upon a bill of exceptions thereafter " to be prepared, settled, and allowed by the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Ward v. ClayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Calderwood v. PeyserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Empire Gold Mining Co. v. Bonanza Gold Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1885
- San Francisco, Alameda & Stockton R.R. v. CaldwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Morris v. De CelisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by71 opinions
- Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. California Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
- Rooney v. Vermont Investment Corp.California Supreme Court · 1973
- Burns v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Pollitz v. WickershamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. King Land & Improvement Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
66 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.