Schurtz v. Romer
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWorks, J.
The appellant Kerkow gave notice of an appeal from the judgment,- and from the order denying him a new trial. He gave an undertaking on appeal from the judgment alone. No reference was made in the undertaking to the order denying the new trial, or the appeal therefrom. After the time provided by law for giving the undertaking on appeal in the court below, the said appellant applied to the chief justice to approve an undertaking to be filed in this court. The undertaking was approved by the chief justice, and subsequently filed. The respondent moves to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that no…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- In re the Estate of CookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Gray v. PalmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- McLaughlin v. DohertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Home & Loan Associates v. WilkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Berniaud v. BeecherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Magee v. WhitacreNevada Supreme Court · 1939
- Moulton v. SmithArizona Supreme Court · 1922
- Lane v. PellissierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Pacific Paving Co. v. BoltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Wood v. Etiwanda Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.