From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stitt v. Stitt

Supreme Court of California
Feb 13, 1936
54 P.2d 460 (Cal. 1936)

Opinion

Docket No. L.A. 15376.

February 13, 1936.

MOTION for diminution of the record on appeal. Motion granted.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

W.C. Dalzell for Appellant.

Paul J. Otto and Paul E. Iverson for Respondent.


THE COURT.

Respondent has moved for a diminution of the record in order to bring before this court an order, made by the trial court subsequent to the filing of the transcript here, correcting certain typographical errors which occurred in the findings as originally signed. [1] It sufficiently appears that the correction was properly made by the lower court, and that it is necessary to a complete understanding of the record that the order making the corrections be now brought up and made a part of the record on appeal.

The motion for diminution is therefore granted.


Summaries of

Stitt v. Stitt

Supreme Court of California
Feb 13, 1936
54 P.2d 460 (Cal. 1936)
Case details for

Stitt v. Stitt

Case Details

Full title:JULIA LOUISE STITT, Respondent, v. CORWIN J. STITT, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Feb 13, 1936

Citations

54 P.2d 460 (Cal. 1936)
54 P.2d 460

Citing Cases

Stitt v. Stitt

The trial court found the material allegations of plaintiff's complaint to be true and gave judgment that she…