Lambert v. Marcuse
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
CHIPMAN, C.
Foreclosure of street assessment lien. Plaintiff had judgment, and defendants appeal from the order denying motion for a new trial.
Defendants demurred to the complaint for insufficiency, and also on the ground of ambiguity and uncertainty. There is no appeal from the judgment, and the rule is, that the sufficiency of the complaint canno-t be considered on an appeal from an order denying a motion for a new trial. (Onderdonk v. San Francisco, 75 Cal. 534; Wheeler v. Kassabaum, 76 Cal. 90; Evans v. Paige, 102 Cal. 132; Bode v. Lee, 102 Cal. 583.)
Appellant cites Holland v. McDade, 125…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bode v. LeeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Holland v. McDadeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Williams v. McDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Onderdonk v. City & Cty. of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1888
- Evans v. PaigeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fawkes v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Holswade v. City of HuntingtonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1924
- Mader v. ChristieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Burns v. CaseyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910