Legal Opinion

Berman v. Blankenship Motors

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 24, 1934No. Civ. No. 8751PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, P. J.

This is a motion to dismiss an appeal upon the ground that the notice of appeal came too late.

Defendants, respondents here, presented a motion for a new trial but the court denied the motion. On the same day the clerk made -a note thereof in his rough minutes and the next day the court’s ruling was duly entered in the regular minutes. The date of this entry, however, was of the date of the ruling.

Section 939, Code of Civil Procedure, provides: “If proceedings on motion for a new trial are pending, the time *135for appeal from the judgment shall not expire until thirty days after entry in the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Brownell v. Superior Court of Yolo Cty.California Supreme Court · 1910
  2. State v. Scott, County Com'r.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1926

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Jablon v. HennebergerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. King v. WilsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  3. Verdier v. VerdierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  4. Grande v. DonovanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  5. Seaboard Surety Corp. v. Hollywood State BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API