Flores v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

California Supreme Court

Flores v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

139 P. 73, 167 Cal. 794, 1914 Cal. LEXIS 533

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 13, 1914

DocketL.A. No. 3645.

StatusPublished

This text of 139 P. 73 (Flores v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County) 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

Flores v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 139 P. 73, 167 Cal. 794, 1914 Cal. LEXIS 533 (Cal. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an application for a supersedeas to stay proceedings upon a judgment of the superior court of Los Angeles County in an action entitled Title Insurance and Trust Company v. California Development Company et al. The petitioners have appealed from said judgment and have filed an undertaking on appeal in the sum of three hundred dollars, but have not yet filed a transcript on appeal and their appeal has not been entered on the register of actions in this court. The application should have been entitled, filed, and registered as a motion in the said appeal, as explained in the opinion this day filed in Southern PacificCompany et al. v. Superior Court, (S.F. No. 6718), ante, p. 250, [139 P. 69], upon a similar application to stay the same judgment.

The facts are substantially identical and for the reasons given in that opinion the application for a supersedeas is denied. *Page 795

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

This is an application for a supersedeas to stay proceedings upon a judgment of the superior court of Los Angeles County in an action entitled Title Insurance and Trust Company v. California Development Company et al. The petitioners have appealed from said judgment and have filed an undertaking on appeal in the sum of three hundred dollars, but have not yet filed a transcript on appeal and their appeal has not been entered on the register of actions in this court. The application should have been entitled, filed, and registered as a motion in the said appeal, as explained in the opinion this day filed in Southern PacificCompany et al. v. Superior Court, (S.F. No. 6718), ante, p. 250, [139 P. 69], upon a similar application to stay the same judgment.

The facts are substantially identical and for the reasons given in that opinion the application for a supersedeas is denied. *Page 795

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 P. 73, 167 Cal. 794, 1914 Cal. LEXIS 533, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flores-v-superior-court-of-los-angeles-county-cal-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack