Blizard v. Drinkhouse

California Supreme Court

Blizard v. Drinkhouse

65 P. 475, 6 Cal. Unrep. 695

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJune 18, 1901

DocketS. F. No. 2655

StatusPublished

This text of 65 P. 475 (Blizard v. Drinkhouse) 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

Blizard v. Drinkhouse, 65 P. 475, 6 Cal. Unrep. 695 (Cal. 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A motion by respondent to dismiss the appeal has been submitted. The ground of the motion is that appellant did not file his points and authorities in time. While the excuse given by one of appellant’s attorneys under oath is not entirely satisfactory, still we think it sufficient to save his client from the penalty of a refusal to hear his appeal on its merits, particularly as the points were on file at" the time of the hearing, and no delay was caused by the delinquency, which was only for a very short period. The motion is denied.

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

PER CURIAM.

A motion by respondent to dismiss the appeal has been submitted. The ground of the motion is that appellant did not file his points and authorities in time. While the excuse given by one of appellant’s attorneys under oath is not entirely satisfactory, still we think it sufficient to save his client from the penalty of a refusal to hear his appeal on its merits, particularly as the points were on file at" the time of the hearing, and no delay was caused by the delinquency, which was only for a very short period. The motion is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 P. 475, 6 Cal. Unrep. 695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blizard-v-drinkhouse-cal-1901.