Legal Opinion

Hutchason v. Marks

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 20, 1942No. Civ. 13759PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchauer, P. J.

Respondent plaintiff has moved to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the order attempted to be appealed from is not an appealable order. The notice of appeal recites that it is taken “from the order . . . granting plaintiff’s motion for a new trial as against defendant Roland Cummings.” Plaintiff contends that the action is equitable in character, that in it trial by jury was not a matter of right, and hence that the order granting a new trial is not in the category made appealable by statute.

Section 963 of the Code of Civil Procedure is the statute in question. It provides that “An…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Farrell v. City of OntarioCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  2. Pacific Western Oil Co. v. Bern Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Davis v. Rite-Lite Sales Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Hughes v. DunlapCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Swasey v. De L'EtancheCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Raedeke v. Gibraltar Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Paularena v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  3. Orange Cnty. Water Dist. v. Alcoa Global Fasteners, Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  4. Peterson v. PetersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  5. Robinson v. PulsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946

19 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