Knoch v. Haizlip
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION to dismiss appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order refusing a new trial. Curtis D. Wilbur, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
Appeals by plaintiffs from the judgment and from an order denying their motion for a new trial were submitted for decision on April 18, 1912. The respondents, in their brief, ask that the appeals be dismissed for failure of the appellants to “furnish the requisite papers.” (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 954.)
There is on file a record, made up in compliance, or attempted compliance, with the new method provided by sections 953a, 953b, and 953e of the Code of Civil Procedure. It contains copies of the pleadings, the findings of fact and conclusions of law, the judgment, the notice of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Christenson Lumber Co. v. SeawellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Waterbury v. Temescal Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1909
3Cited by7 opinions
- Totten v. BarlowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Huffaker v. DonnellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Pierce v. WorksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- First National Bank v. StansburyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Harpold v. SlocumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.