Legal Opinion

Ramsay v. Rodgers

California Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 1922No. S. F. No. 10220PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, C. J.

The respondent moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground that no transcript, prepared and authenticated as required by law, has been filed within the time allowed by the rules of this court.

Prior to the filing of the notice of motion to dismiss the appeal the appellants had procured from the clerk of the superior court and had filed in this court a transcript of the papers included in the judgment-roll, duly certified by the clerk of said superior court. We are of the opinion that under the rules of court and the law as they now exist this is a sufficient compliance with the law and with our…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McKinnell v. HansenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
  2. Beckett v. StuartCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
  3. Harpold v. SlocumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  4. In Re MooneyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
  5. Lapique v. PlummerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Locke Paddon v. Locke PaddonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. McKeon v. SambranoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Miller v. PriceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Benson v. GardnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Charles v. City of Crescent CityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API