Home/California Court of Appeal/McClintock v. Robinson

McClintock v. Robinson

59 P.2d 636, 15 Cal. App. 2d 511, 1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 87
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal
DecidedJuly 16, 1936
DocketCiv. No. 1638
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 59 P.2d 636 (McClintock v. Robinson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
McClintock v. Robinson, 59 P.2d 636, 15 Cal. App. 2d 511, 1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 87 (Cal. Ct. App. 1936).

Opinion

TURRENTINE, J., pro tem.

Respondent filed his motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appellant had not filed his opening brief within the time provided by law. Subsequent to the filing of the motion, but before the hearing thereof, appellant had served and filed his opening brief.

On the authority of Graybiel v. Consolidated Associations, Ltd., 14 Cal. App. (2d) 547 [58 Pac. (2d) 665], the motion is denied.

Barnard, P. J., and Marks, J., concurred.

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

Related

McClintock v. Robinson
59 P.2d 636 (California Court of Appeal, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 P.2d 636, 15 Cal. App. 2d 511, 1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 87, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcclintock-v-robinson-calctapp-1936.