Cole v. Rush

California Supreme Court

Cole v. Rush

40 Cal. 2d 178

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 20, 1953

DocketL. A. No. 22358

StatusPublished

This text of 40 Cal. 2d 178 (Cole v. Rush) 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

Cole v. Rush, 40 Cal. 2d 178 (Cal. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

This is an appeal from ~n order sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend. Such an order is nonappealable (Evans v. Dabney (1951), 37 Cal.2d 758, 759 [235 P.2d 604], and authorities there cited; 3 Cal.Jur.2d 476), and this court must, therefore, dismiss the appeal of its own motion. (Collins v. Corse (1936), 8 Cal.2d 123, 124 [64 P.2d 137]; Estate of Brady (1948), 32 Cal.2d 478, 480 [196 P.2d 881]; Rosenberg v. Knesboro (1947), 80 Cal.App.2d 36, 38 [180 P.2d 750]; see, also, 4 Cal.Jur.2d 337, and cases there cited.)

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

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

THE COURT.

This is an appeal from ~n order sustaining a demurrer without leave to amend. Such an order is nonappealable (Evans v. Dabney (1951), 37 Cal.2d 758, 759 [235 P.2d 604], and authorities there cited; 3 Cal.Jur.2d 476), and this court must, therefore, dismiss the appeal of its own motion. (Collins v. Corse (1936), 8 Cal.2d 123, 124 [64 P.2d 137]; Estate of Brady (1948), 32 Cal.2d 478, 480 [196 P.2d 881]; Rosenberg v. Knesboro (1947), 80 Cal.App.2d 36, 38 [180 P.2d 750]; see, also, 4 Cal.Jur.2d 337, and cases there cited.)

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 Cal. 2d 178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cole-v-rush-cal-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack