Legal Opinion

Sterling Corporation v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided June 18, 1929No. Docket No. L.A. 11186PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.

Petitioner, Sterling Corporation, seeks by mandamus to compel Honorable Elias V. Rosenkranz, as judge pro tempore of the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, to settle and allow a stenographic reporter’s transcript, as provided in section 953a of the Code of Civil Procedure, for use upon appeal in an action wherein the said court rendered judgment against it as defendant and thereafter denied its motion for a new trial. Petitioner alleges that the trial judge refused to certify the transcript because he was of the view that petitioner had failed to comply with the provision of section…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hamaker v. KeatingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Griffin v. KentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Attkisson v. ReynoldsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  4. Fiske v. GosbeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Spear v. MonroeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. DiGenova v. State Board of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Davilla v. Liberty Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  3. California Standardbred Sires Stakes Committee, Inc. v. California Horse Racing BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
  4. Lotus Car Ltd. v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  5. Lotus Car Ltd. v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968

11 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