Dorland v. Cunningham
California Supreme Court
Appeals from certain orders of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcKinstry, J.
The notice of appeal points to- two orders, alleged to be special orders after final judgment. The first is said, in the notice, to be an order made and entered December 27,1882, vacating and setting aside an order made and entered August 21,1882, denying defendants’ motion for a new trial; *485the second, an order made and entered on the 9th of January, 1883, denying plaintiff’s motion to have the order of December 27, 1882, vacated and set aside.
The transcript contains no order of August 21,1882, or of any other date, which purports to be an order denying the defendants’ motion for a new trial.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Coombs v. Hibberd.California Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by24 opinions
- Holtum v. GriefCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Drinkhouse v. Van NessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Barrett v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
- Carpenter v. Superior Court of San Joaquin Cty.California Supreme Court · 1888
- United Railroads v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.