Quivey v. Gambert
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Third Judicial District, Santa Clara County. The plaintiff recovered judgment in the Court below, and the defendant moved for a new trial and filed a statement. On motion of, plaintiff's attorney the Court struck out the statement. The other facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Sanderson, J.:
This is an appeal from an order striking out a statement on motion for new trial. The respondent moves to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that no appeal lies from such an order.
We have recently held, in several cases, that an order striking out a statement on motion for new trial is not appealable. (Leffingwell v. Griffing, 29 Cal. 193; Ketchum v. Crippen, 31 Cal. 365; Pendegast v. Knox, ante, 73; Genella v. Relyea, ante, 159.) It is true, we entertained such an appeal in Harper v. Minor, 27 Cal. 107, and Jenkins v. Frink, 27 Cal. 337, but the point that such an…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Harper v. MinorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Ketchum v. CrippenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Jenkins v. FrinkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
3Cited by22 opinions
- Clark v. CraneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Wetherbee v. CarrollCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Beach v. Spokane Ranch & Water Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1901
- Harris v. San Francisco Sugar Refining Co.California Supreme Court · 1871
- Marshall v. Golden Fleece G. & S. M. Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1881
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.