Mallory v. See
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County striking from the files a notice of intention to move for a new trial. E. P. TTnangst, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, C.
The superior court made an order striking from the files the notice of intention to move for new trial. The respondents contend that the notice of intention was too late: 1. Because filed more than six months after judgment; and 2. Because filed more than ten days after actual notice of the decision.
1. On the first point it is contended that by the expiration of the time allowed for appeal a judgment becomes final, and can no longer be reviewed, either directly or indirectly, by motion for new trial. Hence, it is claimed, the time allowed by section 659 of the Code of Civil Procedure…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Borland v. ThorntonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Dow v. RossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Barron v. DelevalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Burnett v. StearnsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Taylor v. WestonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Lohman v. LohmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Hamaker v. KeatingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Granger v. RichardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
- Hecq v. ConnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Hughes v. De MundCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.