Penland v. Golden

California Court of Appeal

Penland v. Golden

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

California Court of Appeal·Decided November 5, 1951·No. Civ. No. 18357·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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.

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

Pincite

236 P.2d 823 (Penland v. Golden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related