Penland v. Golden

California Court of Appeal

Penland v. Golden

236 P.2d 823, 107 Cal. App. 2d 256, 1951 Cal. App. LEXIS 1892

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 5, 1951

DocketCiv. No. 18357

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 236 P.2d 823 (Penland v. Golden) 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

Penland v. Golden, 236 P.2d 823, 107 Cal. App. 2d 256, 1951 Cal. App. LEXIS 1892 (Cal. Ct. App. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

HANSON, J. pro. tem.

This is an appeal from an order sustaining a demurrer to a complaint with leave to amend. As an appeal does not lie from such an order, but only from a judgment entered thereon we are without jurisdiction to review the case on its merits. (Cornic v. Stewart, 179 Cal. 242 [176 P. 164].) Accordingly, we are required on our own motion to dismiss the appeal.

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

White, P. J., and Doran, J., concurred.

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

HANSON, J. pro. tem.

This is an appeal from an order sustaining a demurrer to a complaint with leave to amend. As an appeal does not lie from such an order, but only from a judgment entered thereon we are without jurisdiction to review the case on its merits. (Cornic v. Stewart, 179 Cal. 242 [176 P. 164].) Accordingly, we are required on our own motion to dismiss the appeal.

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

White, P. J., and Doran, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 P.2d 823, 107 Cal. App. 2d 256, 1951 Cal. App. LEXIS 1892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/penland-v-golden-calctapp-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack