McClintock v. Robinson

59 P.2d 636, 15 Cal. App. 2d 511, 1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 87
California Court of Appeal·Decided July 16, 1936·No. Civ. No. 1638·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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

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

59 P.2d 636 (McClintock v. Robinson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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