Chamberlin v. Reed

California Supreme Court

Chamberlin v. Reed

16 Cal. 207

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1860

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 16 Cal. 207 (Chamberlin v. Reed) 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

Chamberlin v. Reed, 16 Cal. 207 (Cal. 1860).

Pincite

Opinion

Cope, J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, C. J. concurring.

Where an appeal regularly taken is dismissed for want of prosecution, the dismissal operates as an affirmance of the judgment, and a second appeal cannot be allowed. The only mode of avoiding the consequences of such dismissal is to move, during the term or before the remittitur has gone out, to vacate the order and reinstate the cause. The appeal must be dismissed, and it is so ordered.

See Karth v. Light (15 Cal).

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

Cope, J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, C. J. concurring.

Where an appeal regularly taken is dismissed for want of prosecution, the dismissal operates as an affirmance of the judgment, and a second appeal cannot be allowed. The only mode of avoiding the consequences of such dismissal is to move, during the term or before the remittitur has gone out, to vacate the order and reinstate the cause. The appeal must be dismissed, and it is so ordered.

See Karth v. Light (15 Cal).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 Cal. 207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chamberlin-v-reed-cal-1860.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack