Kientz v. Harris
256 P.2d 995, 117 Cal. App. 2d 810, 1953 Cal. App. LEXIS 1886
Opinion
In Kientz v. Harris, 3 Civil No. 8418 (ante, p. 787 [257 P.2d 41]) we held that upon the facts stated the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction in this court to entertain the same. Motion to dismiss this appeal has been made upon the same ground. The facts in each case as to jurisdiction are identical. There is no need, therefore, to file an extended opinion herein.
Upon the authority of that case, the motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal herein is dismissed.
Peek, J., and Sehottky, J., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kientz v. Harris, 256 P.2d 995, 117 Cal. App. 2d 810, 1953 Cal. App. LEXIS 1886 (Cal. Ct. App. 1953).
256 P.2d 995 (Kientz v. Harris) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Smith v. Big Horn Mining Co.
332 P.2d 191 (California Court of Appeal, 1958)