Hinkel v. Donohue
California Supreme Court
Motion to dismiss an appeal from the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
This is a motion to dismiss an appeal, upon the ground that the necessary parties were not all served with notice of appeal.
The action is, in form, ejectment, and several persons are named in the complaint as defendants. Before either of the defendants had been served with summons or had appeared, plaintiff’s attorney filed with the clerk of the court a dismissal of the action. Afterwards, two of the named defendants — Patrick Donohue and Mary Donohue — filed an answer, and also a cross-complaint, asking affirmative relief. Thereafter, on motion of plaintiff, the court made an order…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Randall v. HunterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by4 opinions
- Blyth & Fargo Co. v. SwensonUtah Supreme Court · 1897
- Terry v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Aulbach v. DahlerIdaho Supreme Court · 1895
- Nason v. JohnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905