From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cole v. Rush

Supreme Court of California
Jan 20, 1953
40 Cal.2d 178 (Cal. 1953)

Opinion

Docket No. L.A. 22358.

January 20, 1953.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend. Philbrick McCoy, Judge. Appeal dismissed.

John C. Stevenson and Lionel Richman for Appellants.

Parker, Stanbury, Reese McGee and A.P.G. Steffes for Respondent.


THE COURT.

[1] This is an appeal from an order sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend. Such an order is nonappealable ( Evans v. Dabney (1951), 37 Cal.2d 758, 759 [ 235 P.2d 604], and authorities there cited; 3 Cal.Jur.2d 476), and this court must, therefore, dismiss the appeal of its own motion. ( Collins v. Corse (1936), 8 Cal.2d 123, 124 [ 64 P.2d 137]; Estate of Brady (1948), 32 Cal.2d 478, 480 [ 196 P.2d 881]; Rosenberg v. Knesboro (1947), 80 Cal.App.2d 36, 38 [ 180 P.2d 750]; see, also, 4 Cal.Jur.2d 337, and cases there cited.)

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.


Summaries of

Cole v. Rush

Supreme Court of California
Jan 20, 1953
40 Cal.2d 178 (Cal. 1953)
Case details for

Cole v. Rush

Case Details

Full title:DOROTHEA COLE et al., Appellants, v. PAUL RUSH et al., Defendants; FRANK…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jan 20, 1953

Citations

40 Cal.2d 178 (Cal. 1953)
252 P.2d 1

Citing Cases

Zappas v. King Williams Press, Inc.

Of course, such orders are not appealable. ( Daar v. Yellow Cab Co., 67 Cal.2d 695, 699 [ 63 Cal.Rptr. 724,…

West v. Cranmer

) [3] An attempted appeal from a nonappealable order must be dismissed by the appellate court on its own…