Legal Opinion

Belle Vista Investment Co. v. Hassen

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 24, 1963No. Civ. No. 26953PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

After a judgment for money had been entered against appellant, an undertaking executed by two sureties was given for the purpose of staying execution of the judgment under Code of Civil Procedure, section 942. The sureties failed to qualify. This appellate court has discretion to issue a writ of supersedeas on condition that a proper undertaking be furnished. (Isaak v. Evidon, 197 Cal.App.2d 453 [17 Cal.Rptr. 339]; 3 Witkin, Cal. Procedure, p. 2214.)

The circumstances presented here indicate that respondent will suffer no prejudice if proper security is given. A writ of supersedeas…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Isaak v. EvidonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Brandt v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API