Legal Opinion

Security First National Bank v. Board of Supervisors

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 20, 1932No. Docket No. 666Published

1Opinion of the Court

AMES, J., pro tem.

This is a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appellants failed to comply with certain portions of rule VIII of the Rules of this court, adopted by the Judicial Council of the State of California on the sixth day of May, 1932, and which took effect on the first day of July, 1932.-

In its notice of motion to dismiss the appeal respondent has not sufficiently designated the portions of rule VIII which it claims have been violated by the appellants, but from a memorandum of points and authorities attached to its notice of motion it appears that it relies upon…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Stumpf v. Board of Supervisors of San Luis Obispo CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Rigdon v. Common CouncilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
  3. Rauer v. Justices' CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API