Hester v. McMullan
California Court of Appeal
MOTION to dismiss an appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Imperial County denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
JAMES,
to dismiss an appeal taken from an
order denying the application of the plaintiff for a new trial. The principal ground of the motion is, as stated in the notice, that the law does not provide for the taking of an appeal from such an order. It appears that on the twenty-sixth day of April, 1915, a judgment was entered in the cause; that on June 25th plaintiff filed an undertaking on appeal; and that on October 15, 1915, a statement of the ease on motion for a new trial was settled by the judge, and the notice of appeal from the order denying plaintiff’s motion for a new trial was filed…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pignaz v. BurnettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- In Re Estate of RichmondCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
- Boin v. Spreckels Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- People v. NashCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
3Cited by1 opinion
- Crocker v. CrockerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927