Bond v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Bond v. Superior Court

163 P. 496, 174 Cal. 376, 1917 Cal. LEXIS 802

California Supreme Court·Decided February 6, 1917·No. S. F. No. 8120.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

On the conclusion of the oral argument, the following opinion was rendered: The court is of the opinion that the case is not distinguishable from Huerstal v. Muir, 62 Cal. 479, that the amendment to section 1210 of the Code of Civil Procedure has not changed the law in the respect suggested, and does not grant or confer any right of appeal in such a matter, that under these circumstances Huerstal v. Muir, 62 Cal. 479, controls, and the portion of the order complained of in this proceeding should be annulled.

It is so ordered.

Sloss, J., Melvin, J., and Lawlor, J., dissented.

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

On the conclusion of the oral argument, the following opinion was rendered: The court is of the opinion that the case is not distinguishable from Huerstal v. Muir, 62 Cal. 479, that the amendment to section 1210 of the Code of Civil Procedure has not changed the law in the respect suggested, and does not grant or confer any right of appeal in such a matter, that under these circumstances Huerstal v. Muir, 62 Cal. 479, controls, and the portion of the order complained of in this proceeding should be annulled.

It is so ordered.

Sloss, J., Melvin, J., and Lawlor, J., dissented.

Bond v. Superior Court, 163 P. 496, 174 Cal. 376, 1917 Cal. LEXIS 802 (Cal. 1917).

Pincite

163 P. 496 (Bond v. Superior Court) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related