From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cunningham v. Hopkins

Supreme Court of California
Jul 1, 1857
8 Cal. 33 (Cal. 1857)

Opinion

         Appeal from the County Court of Amador County.

         Action to recover a mining-claim by plaintiffs, Cunningham and Mears, before a justice of the peace. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiffs appeal to the County Court. Defendant moves for a dismissal of the appeal, on the ground that the undertaking of plaintiffs is bad. Plaintiffs then offer to file a good one. Afterward, the Court refuses permission, and enters judgment of dismissal, from which plaintiffs appeal to this Court.

         COUNSEL:

         Robinson, Beatty & Botts, for Appellants.

          Smith & Hardy, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Burnett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Murray, C. J., concurring.

         OPINION

          BURNETT, Judge

         The plaintiffs brought this action before a justice of the peace, when judgment was given against them for costs, from which they appealed to the County Court. The appeal was dismissed upon the ground that the undertaking was insufficient, and plaintiff appealed to this Court.

         In the late case of Bryan v. Berry (6 Cal. 394), we held that " where a mere defective undertaking has been bona fide given, and the appellant will file a good one before the case is submitted, this Court will allow him to do so."

         In this case, the plaintiffs offered to amend the bond before the motion to dismiss was determined, and they should have been permitted to do so.

         Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.


Summaries of

Cunningham v. Hopkins

Supreme Court of California
Jul 1, 1857
8 Cal. 33 (Cal. 1857)
Case details for

Cunningham v. Hopkins

Case Details

Full title:CUNNINGHAM et al v. HOPKINS

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jul 1, 1857

Citations

8 Cal. 33 (Cal. 1857)

Citing Cases

Stimpson Etc. Scale Co. v. Superior Ct.

"In such cases it has been held that the superior court may allow a new undertaking to be filed. ( Coulter v.…

McCracken v. Superior Court

In such cases it has been held that the superior court may allow a new undertaking to be filed. (Coulter v.…