Beilby v. Superior Court

138 Cal. 51
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 10, 1902
DocketS. F. No. 3413
StatusPublished

This text of 138 Cal. 51 (Beilby v. Superior Court) 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
Beilby v. Superior Court, 138 Cal. 51 (Cal. 1902).

Opinion

THE COURT.

Petition for certiorari, presenting the following ease: Petitioner was plaintiff in an action appealed from justice’s court to superior court. Upon a trial de novo there was a verdict for defendant. More than five days after the verdict, but within an extension of time granted by the trial judge, the defendant filed his cost-bill, the amount of which was included in his judgment. Petitioner claims that the judgment is to that extent void, because the trial judge [52]*52had no power to extend the time for filing the cost-bill, and that, being too late, costs were waived.

We think, however, that the service and filing of a cost-bill is fairly within a proper construction of section 1054 of the Code of Civil Procedure authorizing extensions of time. It is substantially “a notice other than of appeal.”

Writ denied.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
138 Cal. 51, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beilby-v-superior-court-cal-1902.