Hickinbotham v. Monroe

California Supreme Court

Hickinbotham v. Monroe

28 Cal. 489

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1865

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 28 Cal. 489 (Hickinbotham v. Monroe) 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

Hickinbotham v. Monroe, 28 Cal. 489 (Cal. 1865).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Sawyer, J.

The time for filing briefs having expired three months ago, and none having been filed, and there being no points on file,, as required by rule seventeen, the judgment is affirmed, on the authority of Edmondson v. Alameda County, 24 Cal, 349, and Hutton v. Reed, 25 Cal. 488. A like disposition will be made of all cases similarly situated, when taken up for decision in their proper order.

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

By the Court,

Sawyer, J.

The time for filing briefs having expired three months ago, and none having been filed, and there being no points on file,, as required by rule seventeen, the judgment is affirmed, on the authority of Edmondson v. Alameda County, 24 Cal, 349, and Hutton v. Reed, 25 Cal. 488. A like disposition will be made of all cases similarly situated, when taken up for decision in their proper order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 Cal. 489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hickinbotham-v-monroe-cal-1865.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack