From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taliaferro v. Davis

Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Three
Jun 14, 1963
217 Cal.App.2d 215 (Cal. Ct. App. 1963)

Summary

noting time limit for filing notice of appeal is jurisdictional and dismissing appeal because notice of appeal was filed one day late

Summary of this case from Gaoay v. Superior Court of County of San Francisco

Opinion

Docket No. 20659.

June 14, 1963.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Contra Costa County striking a cross-complaint. Norman A. Gregg, Judge. Dismissed.

E.A. Taliaferro, in pro. per., for Cross-complainant and Appellant.

Frisbie Hoogs and W.H. Hoogs for Cross-defendant and Respondent.


[1] Cross-complainant appeals from an order striking his cross-complaint as to respondent. Memorandum decision announced grant of the motion and directed respondent's counsel to prepare formal order. That order was dated and filed December 20, 1961.

Appellant had 60 days within which to file his notice of appeal (Rules on Appeal, rule 2(a)) [2] That time ran from filing of the order ( id., rule 2(b) (2), (4)). [3] The first day of the 60 was December 21 ( O'Donnell v. City County of San Francisco, 147 Cal.App.2d 63, 66 [ 304 P.2d 852]). The sixtieth day thus was February 18, 1962. Since that date fell on Sunday, the notice would be timely if filed Monday, February 19 (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 12, 12a). Appellant did not file it until Tuesday, February 20. [4] The time limit for filing this notice is jurisdictional ( In re Del Campo, 55 Cal.2d 816, 817 [ 13 Cal.Rptr. 192, 361 P.2d 912]). This court has no discretion, but must dismiss the appeal on its own motion ( Langan v. Langan, 89 Cal. 186, 195 [26 P. 764]; and see Estate of Hanley, 23 Cal.2d 120, 123 [ 142 P.2d 423, 149 A.L.R. 1250]).

Now California Rules of Court, rule 2(a).

Now California Rules of Court, rule 2(b) (2), (4).

Appeal dismissed.

Salsman, J., and Devine, J., concurred.


Summaries of

Taliaferro v. Davis

Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Three
Jun 14, 1963
217 Cal.App.2d 215 (Cal. Ct. App. 1963)

noting time limit for filing notice of appeal is jurisdictional and dismissing appeal because notice of appeal was filed one day late

Summary of this case from Gaoay v. Superior Court of County of San Francisco
Case details for

Taliaferro v. Davis

Case Details

Full title:E.A. TALIAFERRO, Cross-complainant and Appellant, v. DOROTHY DAVIS…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Three

Date published: Jun 14, 1963

Citations

217 Cal.App.2d 215 (Cal. Ct. App. 1963)
31 Cal. Rptr. 693

Citing Cases

Nu-Way Associates, Inc. v. Keefe

The rule is applicable even though notice of appeal is filed but one day late. (See Deward v. La Rue, 235…

In re William C.

The notice was timely filed on Monday, August 9, the first court day after the 60th day. (Code Civ. Proc.,…