In re Donnolly

California Supreme Court

In re Donnolly

74 P. 139, 7 Cal. Unrep. 172

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 10, 1903

DocketCr. No. 1029

StatusPublished

This text of 74 P. 139 (In re Donnolly) 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

In re Donnolly, 74 P. 139, 7 Cal. Unrep. 172 (Cal. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

SHAW, J.

This is an application for a writ of mandate to compel the judge of the court below to settle a bill of exceptions to be used on appeal by the petitioner, as defendant in the case of People of the State of California v. Charles Donnolly. Since the submission of the application for a mandate the transcript on appeal in the case of People v. Donnolly has been filed, showing that the bill of exceptions in question has been settled by the judge, and it is made a part of the record on appeal. In view of this fact, there is nothing remaining before the court for decision. It is therefore ordered that the petition be dismissed, without costs.

We concur: Van Dyke, J.; Angellotti, J.; McFarland, J.

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

SHAW, J.

This is an application for a writ of mandate to compel the judge of the court below to settle a bill of exceptions to be used on appeal by the petitioner, as defendant in the case of People of the State of California v. Charles Donnolly. Since the submission of the application for a mandate the transcript on appeal in the case of People v. Donnolly has been filed, showing that the bill of exceptions in question has been settled by the judge, and it is made a part of the record on appeal. In view of this fact, there is nothing remaining before the court for decision. It is therefore ordered that the petition be dismissed, without costs.

We concur: Van Dyke, J.; Angellotti, J.; McFarland, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 P. 139, 7 Cal. Unrep. 172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-donnolly-cal-1903.