Miller v. Rea
This text of 12 P. 431 (Miller v. Rea) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Partition. Appeal by J. L. N. Shepard.
A motion was made to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the appellant had not served the notice of appeal on all the adverse parties or their attorneys.
The appeal is from specific parts of the interlocutory decree only, viz., the parts relating to certain portions of an undivided one sixteenth of the rancho Las Animas; the decree as to the remainder of the rancho is not inwolved in the appeal. The notice was served on the parties (or their attorneys) interested adversely to the appellant, in so much of the undivided one sixteenth as is involved in the appeal.
The motion is denied.
McKinstry, J., Morrison, C. J., and Sharpstein, J., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
12 P. 431, 71 Cal. 405, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-rea-cal-1886.