North Confidence Min. Etc. Co. v. Fitch

223 P. 974, 193 Cal. 336, 1924 Cal. LEXIS 309
California Supreme Court·Decided February 25, 1924·No. Sac. No. 3561.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The respondents moved to dismiss the appeal from the judgment taken by the appellants upon the ground that the notice of appeal was filed too late. This question turns upon whether or not there was a motion pending for a new trial. Appellants claim that the notice of intention to move for a new trial was not properly served and filed. Since the hearing of the motion affidavits have been filed showing that the notice of intention to move for a new trial was properly served by mail. The notice *Page 337 of appeal from the judgment was filed within due time after the disposition of the motion for a new trial and the motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment is, therefore, denied.

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

North Confidence Min. Etc. Co. v. Fitch, 223 P. 974, 193 Cal. 336, 1924 Cal. LEXIS 309 (Cal. 1924).

223 P. 974 (North Confidence Min. Etc. Co. v. Fitch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chamberlain Co. v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co.
170 P.2d 85 (California Court of Appeal, 1946)