Thompson v. Lynch
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Wallace, C. J.:
The transcript of the record filed does not comply with the requirements of the sixth rule of practice of this Court. The proceedings are not chronologically arranged. The record is made up, in the main, of motions and counter motions, motions to vacate, orders already entered upon motion, and notice, etc.; and these are thrown into the transcript in a confused mass, and without the slightest attention to their respective dates. Reasonable attention *483upon the part of counsel, in the first instance, to perspicuity of arrangement of the record would greatly lessen the…
2Cited by8 opinions
- State v. NeilIdaho Supreme Court · 1937
- People v. CenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Vert v. VertSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1893
- State Ex Rel. McVay v. District Court of Fourth Judicial DistrictMontana Supreme Court · 1953
- Cooney v. FurlongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.