McGuire v. McGuire

California Court of Appeal

McGuire v. McGuire

19 P.2d 7, 129 Cal. App. 644, 1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 1108

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedFebruary 16, 1933

DocketDocket No. 8884.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 19 P.2d 7 (McGuire v. McGuire) 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

McGuire v. McGuire, 19 P.2d 7, 129 Cal. App. 644, 1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 1108 (Cal. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

HOUSER, J.

On presentation of a motion by respondent to dismiss the appeal from the judgment, because of the failure of appellant to file transcript within the time prescribed by statute and the rules of this court, as well for the reason that appellant heretofore has accepted payment of a portion of the benefits awarded to her by the judgment—it appearing to the satisfaction of this court that the said ultimate facts are fully supported by affidavits on behalf of respondent, and which facts are not controverted by affidavit or otherwise by appellant, it is ordered that said motion be and it is granted; and in accordance therewith, that said appeal be and it is dismissed. (See Rules I, V, VI and XI of this court; secs. 650, 659, 939 and 953a, Code Civ. Proc.; People v. Lambert, 96 Cal. App. 381, 382 [274 Pac. 401]; Coats v. Coats, 146 Cal. 443, 444 [80 Pac. 694]. Also, Storke v. Storke, 132 Cal. 349, 353 [64 Pac. 578]; People v. Burns, 78 Cal. 645, 646 [21 Pac. 540] ; In re Baby, 87 Cal. 200, 202 [25 Pac. 405, 22 Am. St. Rep. 239]; Estate of Shaver, 131 Cal. 219 [63 Pac. 340].)

Conrey, P. J., and York, J., concurred.

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

HOUSER, J.

On presentation of a motion by respondent to dismiss the appeal from the judgment, because of the failure of appellant to file transcript within the time prescribed by statute and the rules of this court, as well for the reason that appellant heretofore has accepted payment of a portion of the benefits awarded to her by the judgment—it appearing to the satisfaction of this court that the said ultimate facts are fully supported by affidavits on behalf of respondent, and which facts are not controverted by affidavit or otherwise by appellant, it is ordered that said motion be and it is granted; and in accordance therewith, that said appeal be and it is dismissed. (See Rules I, V, VI and XI of this court; secs. 650, 659, 939 and 953a, Code Civ. Proc.; People v. Lambert, 96 Cal. App. 381, 382 [274 Pac. 401]; Coats v. Coats, 146 Cal. 443, 444 [80 Pac. 694]. Also, Storke v. Storke, 132 Cal. 349, 353 [64 Pac. 578]; People v. Burns, 78 Cal. 645, 646 [21 Pac. 540] ; In re Baby, 87 Cal. 200, 202 [25 Pac. 405, 22 Am. St. Rep. 239]; Estate of Shaver, 131 Cal. 219 [63 Pac. 340].)

Conrey, P. J., and York, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 P.2d 7, 129 Cal. App. 644, 1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 1108, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcguire-v-mcguire-calctapp-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack