McNew v. Mulcahy

California Court of Appeal

McNew v. Mulcahy

75 P.2d 516, 24 Cal. App. 2d 476, 1938 Cal. App. LEXIS 933

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJanuary 20, 1938

DocketCiv. No. 1878

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 75 P.2d 516 (McNew v. Mulcahy) 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

McNew v. Mulcahy, 75 P.2d 516, 24 Cal. App. 2d 476, 1938 Cal. App. LEXIS 933 (Cal. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

BARNARD, P. J.

The respondents moved, after the usual three briefs had all been filed, for an order affirming the judgment as provided for in section 3 of rule V of the rules governing this court. An examination of the opening brief and moving papers discloses that it will be necessary to go into the transcript. Under these circumstances this court has frequently held that such a motion should be denied. (See, Hall v. Wolford, 23 Cal. App. (2d) 498 [71 Pac. (2d) 596], and cases there cited.)

The respondent has further moved for an order placing this cause on the Ready for Submission list in the event the motion to affirm is denied. The motions were submitted pursuant to a stipulation of the parties, the briefs are all filed and it appears from the nature of the points involved that a further oral argument is not essential.

The motion to affirm is denied and the motion to transfer the cause to the Ready for Submission list is granted and the cause ordered marked ready for submission.

Marks, J., concurred.

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