Woodruff v. Colyear
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
In denying the petition for a rehearing of the motion to dismiss the appeal in this case, we deem it proper to say what we have already substantially said several times from the bench, that we are satisfied it must be held that the amendment of our Code of Civil Procedure in the year 1915 [Stats. 1915, p. 209, Code Civ. Proc., sec. 963] abolishing the right of appeal from an order denying a new trial, is necessarily applicable in every case where such order was made subsequent to the date of the taking effect of the amendment, regardless of whether the proceeding for a new trial was initiated…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Bates v. Ransome-Crummey Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919
- Wilcox v. HardistyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Hirsch v. All PersonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- San Francisco-Oakland Terminal Railway v. Superior Court of Alameda CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Nathan v. PorterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.