Beardsley v. Frame

15 P. 310, 73 Cal. 634, 1887 Cal. LEXIS 732
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 29, 1887
DocketNo. 12199
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 15 P. 310 (Beardsley v. Frame) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Beardsley v. Frame, 15 P. 310, 73 Cal. 634, 1887 Cal. LEXIS 732 (Cal. 1887).

Opinion

Foote, C.

The notice of appeal is the initiatory step taken in the Superior Court in order to obtain a hearing upon appeal in this court. That notice must be signed by the attorney of record in that court. (Prescott v. Salthouse, 53 Cal. 221; affirmed in Whittle v. Renner, 55 Cal. 395.)

Being a proceeding which must be commenced in the Superior Court where the trial was had, it is not necessary that the attorney who there conducts it shall be entitled to practice law and be heard in that capacity in this court, provided he be qualified to act and is the attorney of record in the court below.

The motion to dismiss the appeal should be denied.

Belcher, C. C., and Hayne, C., concurred.

The Court.

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Nave v. Taugher
193 P. 508 (California Court of Appeal, 1920)
Bashore v. Lamberson
171 P. 968 (California Court of Appeal, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 P. 310, 73 Cal. 634, 1887 Cal. LEXIS 732, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beardsley-v-frame-cal-1887.