Baldie v. BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL TRUST AND SAVINGS ASS'N
This text of 217 P.2d 1011 (Baldie v. BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL TRUST AND SAVINGS ASS'N) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MARY IRENE BALDIE, Appellant,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL TRUST AND SAVINGS ASSOCIATION (a Corporation) et al., Respondents.
Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Two.
Jonathan H. Rowell for Appellant.
Frank V. Kington for Respondents.
(See former opinion in this case, 97 Cal. App.2d 70, 217 P.2d 111.)
THE COURT.
Counsel have asked us to clarify the apportionment of costs on the two appeals. Under the Rules on Appeal (rule 26(a)) the prevailing party is entitled to his costs. These appeals were presented on one clerk's and one reporter's transcript and one set of briefs. However the pleadings, evidence and arguments are separate. Respondent Pacheco is entitled to costs against appellant on his appeal and appellant is entitled to costs on the Bullock appeal. The costs should be apportioned on the basis of the portions of the transcripts and briefs devoted to each case.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
217 P.2d 1011, 97 Cal. App. 2d 614, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baldie-v-bank-of-america-national-trust-and-savings-assn-calctapp-1950.