Blair v. Brownstone Oil Etc. Co.

132 P. 605, 21 Cal. App. 676, 1913 Cal. App. LEXIS 258
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal
DecidedApril 7, 1913
DocketCiv. No. 1321.
StatusPublished

This text of 132 P. 605 (Blair v. Brownstone Oil Etc. Co.) 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.

Bluebook
Blair v. Brownstone Oil Etc. Co., 132 P. 605, 21 Cal. App. 676, 1913 Cal. App. LEXIS 258 (Cal. Ct. App. 1913).

Opinion

Motion to dismiss an appeal from an order denying a new trial. The record shows that notice of appeal from the judgment and from an order denying a new trial was duly given; that within a day or two succeeding an undertaking on appeal from the judgment was filed. Respondents contend that the appeal from the order should be dismissed because the same was not included in the undertaking given. Upon the authority ofMitchell v. California etc. Steamship Co., 154 Cal. 731, [99 P. 202], the motion must be denied. It is there held that the notice of appeal is sufficient regardless of the filing of the undertaking.

Motion denied.

*Page 677

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

Related

Mitchell v. California & Oregon Steamship Co.
99 P. 202 (California Supreme Court, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
132 P. 605, 21 Cal. App. 676, 1913 Cal. App. LEXIS 258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blair-v-brownstone-oil-etc-co-calctapp-1913.