Legal Opinion
Commins v. Guaranty Oil Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 8, 1915No. Civ. No. 1762PublishedCited by 8 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtJames, J.
The plaintiff in this action, at the conclusion of the testimony introduced in support of his main case, was nonsuited. An appeal was taken from the order granting the motion of nonsuit, the record of which order or judgment appeared only in the minutes of the court.
It is first claimed by the respondent that the order granting the motion for a nonsuit, not being followed by a formal judgment of dismissal, was not a final judgment in the sense that that term is used in section 939 of the Code of Civil Procedure, providing for appeals. Section 581 of the Code of Civil Procedure.provides that:…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Pacific Paving Co. v. VizelichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Kimple v. ConwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Matthai v. KennedyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
3Cited by8 opinions
- McColgan v. Jones, Hubbard & Donnell, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1938
- Costa v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Scrimsher v. Reliance Rock Co.California Court of Appeal · 1934
- Allan v. Guaranty Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
- Bengel v. TraegerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.