From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stratton v. Graham

Supreme Court of California
Dec 3, 1885
68 Cal. 168 (Cal. 1885)

Opinion

         Department Two

         Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Napa County, and from an order refusing a new trial.

         Motion to dismiss appeal.

         COUNSEL:

         Henry H. Davis, for Appellant.

          Joy & Ham, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Foote, C. Belcher, C. C., and Searls, C., concurred.

         OPINION

          FOOTE, Judge

         The record before us discloses this state of facts: That a notice of appeal from the judgment and an order denying plaintiff [8 P. 711] a new trial was filed and served on the twenty-fifth day of July, 1883. That no undertaking on appeal was filed, nor was the same ever waived by the adverse party in writing; but that according to the certificate of the clerk of the trial court, a sum of money in lieu thereof was deposited with him for the appellant, on the thirty-first day of August, 1883, -- more than five days after the notice of appeal was served and filed. Therefore, on the authority of Biagi v. Howes , 63 Cal. 384, Francis E. Stratton, claiming to appeal under section 940, Code of Civil Procedure, without having in effect done so, should be refused a hearing by this court.

         The Court. -- For reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the appeal is dismissed.


Summaries of

Stratton v. Graham

Supreme Court of California
Dec 3, 1885
68 Cal. 168 (Cal. 1885)
Case details for

Stratton v. Graham

Case Details

Full title:FRANCIS E. STRATTON, Appellant, v. J. M. GRAHAM, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Dec 3, 1885

Citations

68 Cal. 168 (Cal. 1885)
8 P. 710

Citing Cases

Perkins v. Cooper

The appeal was not effectual for any purpose, no undertaking having been filed or waived within the statutory…

In re Estate of Danielson

Even if this is a case in which the court can dispense with the security on an appeal, it cannot do so after…