In re Siering

California Supreme Court

In re Siering

27 P. 204, 90 Cal. 207, 1891 Cal. LEXIS 913

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 15, 1891

DocketNo. 14341

StatusPublished

This text of 27 P. 204 (In re Siering) 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 Siering, 27 P. 204, 90 Cal. 207, 1891 Cal. LEXIS 913 (Cal. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Paterson, J.

— There is nothing in the transcript to show that the appellants ever filed any claim against the insolvent debtors. The judgment recites that all the creditors of the insolvents who had filed claims, and the assignee, appeared at the hearing of the contest, and mutually agreed upon an adjustment and settlement of all matters of difference between them. If the appellants [208]*208afterwards, by filing claims, acquired the right to move to set aside the judgment or to appeal therefrom, the record should show the facts. What occurred in the court below, subsequent to the entry of the judgment, should appear in the record. It cannot be shown by affidavit in the first instance in this court.

The appeal is dismissed.

McFarland, J., Harrison, J., Garoutte, J., Sharp-stein, J., De Haven, J., and Beatty, C. J., concurred.

Rehearing denied.

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

Paterson, J.

— There is nothing in the transcript to show that the appellants ever filed any claim against the insolvent debtors. The judgment recites that all the creditors of the insolvents who had filed claims, and the assignee, appeared at the hearing of the contest, and mutually agreed upon an adjustment and settlement of all matters of difference between them. If the appellants [208]*208afterwards, by filing claims, acquired the right to move to set aside the judgment or to appeal therefrom, the record should show the facts. What occurred in the court below, subsequent to the entry of the judgment, should appear in the record. It cannot be shown by affidavit in the first instance in this court.

The appeal is dismissed.

McFarland, J., Harrison, J., Garoutte, J., Sharp-stein, J., De Haven, J., and Beatty, C. J., concurred.

Rehearing denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 P. 204, 90 Cal. 207, 1891 Cal. LEXIS 913, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-siering-cal-1891.