Legal Opinion

McNew v. Mulcahy

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 20, 1938No. Civ. No. 1878PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

The respondents moved, after the usual three briefs had all been filed, for an order affirming the judgment as provided for in section 3 of rule V of the rules governing this court. An examination of the opening brief and moving papers discloses that it will be necessary to go into the transcript. Under these circumstances this court has frequently held that such a motion should be denied. (See, Hall v. Wolford, 23 Cal. App. (2d) 498 [71 Pac. (2d) 596], and cases there cited.)

The respondent has further moved for an order placing this cause on the Ready for Submission list in the event the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hall v. WolfordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. McNew v. MulcahyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API