Legal Opinion
Wright v. Snowball
California Supreme Court
Decided July 1, 1873No. 3,619PublishedCited by 4 opinions
Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, County of Yolo. The defendant had judgment in an action to abate a nuisance, and the plaintiff appealed. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The appéal is taken only from the order denying the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial. It nowhere appears that a notice of intention to move for a new trial was given, by the appellant or waived by the respondent by appearance to the *655motion, or in any other manner, and it is objected, and we think well objected, by the respondent, that in the absence of such a notice or waiver, the order denying a new trial cannot be reviewed here.
Order affirmed.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Pico v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- King v. Pony Gold Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1903
- Dominguez v. MascottiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Street v. Lemon Mill & Mining Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1874