Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Unemployment Reserves Commission v. St. Francis Homes Ass'n

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 20, 1943No. Civ. 12251Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

KNIGHT, J., Concurring and dissenting.

I concur in that portion of the foregoing opinion which holds that no appeal lies from the judgment of reversal rendered by the appellate department of the superior court and that therefore the present appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction to entertain it; but I do not concur in the remaining portion thereof whereby after rejecting the appeal the opinion goes on to consider a controlling issue in the case and to decide that issue contrary to the conclusion reached thereon by the superior court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction,…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. City of Madera v. BlackCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Baltimore & Potomac Railroad v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  3. Unemployment Compensation Commission v. HarveySupreme Court of Virginia · 1942
  4. Bank of Bramwell v. County Court of Mercer Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1892
  5. City of Independence v. HindenachSupreme Court of Kansas · 1936

12 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