From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Percy v. Allen

Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District
Dec 9, 1931
119 Cal.App. 106 (Cal. Ct. App. 1931)

Opinion

Docket No. 561.

December 9, 1931.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Riverside County sustaining a demurrer. O.K. Morton, Judge. Dismissed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Harvey D. Taylor, George P. Cook and Myron W. Tilden for Appellants.

C.L. McFarland for Respondent.


Appellants gave the following notice of appeal in the court below: "Notice is hereby given that the plaintiffs do hereby appeal to the Supreme Court of the State of California from the order of the above entitled court made and entered on Monday, the 29th day of December, 1930, sustaining defendant's demurrer to the first amended complaint of the plaintiff above named, and from the whole thereof." As the case is within the appellate jurisdiction of this court it was transferred here for decision.

[1] Under the provisions of section 963 of the Code of Civil Procedure, an appeal cannot be taken from an order sustaining a demurrer. An attempted appeal from such an order fails to give any jurisdiction to the appellate court to entertain it and must be dismissed. ( Bryant v. Kelly, 203 Cal. 721 [ 265 P. 817]; Tyler v. City Council of Huntington Park et al., 97 Cal.App. 724 [ 276 P. 355]; O'Neill v. Hicks, 101 Cal.App. 374 [ 281 P. 531].)

Appeal dismissed.

Barnard, P.J., and Jennings, J., concurred.


Summaries of

Percy v. Allen

Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District
Dec 9, 1931
119 Cal.App. 106 (Cal. Ct. App. 1931)
Case details for

Percy v. Allen

Case Details

Full title:MARGARET PERCY et al., Appellants, v. LILLIAN M. ALLEN, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District

Date published: Dec 9, 1931

Citations

119 Cal.App. 106 (Cal. Ct. App. 1931)
6 P.2d 88

Citing Cases

Stutsman v. Stutsman

[6] The order sustaining the demurrer is not an appealable order. ( Percy v. Allen, 119 Cal.App. 106 [ 6 P.2d…