Legal Opinion
Anglo-California T. Co. v. Oakland Rys.
California Supreme Court
Decided July 2, 1923No. S. F. No. 10758PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[1] The motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the attorney who signed the notice of appeal and prepared the transcript was not the attorney of record and that there had been no substitution of attorneys is granted on the authority of Harrigan v. Bolte, 67 Cal. xxi [8 P. 184].
On August 3, 1923, the supreme court modified the foregoing order as follows:
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Reynolds v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
3Cited by7 opinions
- Echlin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Anglo-California Trust Co. v. Oakland RailwaysCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Youlian v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Jackson v. JacksonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- Starkweather v. EddyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.