Stonesifer v. Armstrong
California Supreme Court
Application to the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. -
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
This is an application for a writ of mandate to compel the respondent to settle a bill of exceptions, in a case tried before him in Stanislaus County, entitled Stonesifer et al. v. Kilburn et al. The bill was not presented to the judge for settlement within the time prescribed by law, or by any order or stipulation extending the same. Upon presentation, although the judge found, and in his order certified, that the same was not served in time, by reason of the mistake, inadvertence, and excusable neglect of one of the attorneys of the plaintiffs who had charge of the matter, he…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Stonesifer v. KilburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Murphy v. StellingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Welty v. CampbellWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1893
- Hicks v. MastenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Wilson v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.