Plecity v. Keilly

California Court of Appeal

Plecity v. Keilly

106 P.2d 207, 41 Cal. App. 2d 206, 1940 Cal. App. LEXIS 224

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedOctober 18, 1940

DocketCiv. No. 12578

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 106 P.2d 207 (Plecity v. Keilly) 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

Plecity v. Keilly, 106 P.2d 207, 41 Cal. App. 2d 206, 1940 Cal. App. LEXIS 224 (Cal. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

McCOMB, J.

Respondents move to dismiss the appeal or affirm the judgment on the grounds that the appeal was taken for delay and that the questions on which a decision of the cause depends are so unsubstantial as not to need further argument.

Prior to November 1, 1939, rule V, section 3 of the Rules for the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal (213 Cal. xliii) provided for the dismissal of an appeal or the affirmance of a judgment on the grounds of the present motion. However, September 29, 1939, the judicial council abrogated the section of rule V just mentioned, effective as of November 1, 1939. (Taylor v. Parsons, 39 Cal. App. (2d) 336 [102 Pac. (2d) 1096].)

Therefore, the present motion is not well taken and is denied.

Moore, P. J., and Wood, J., concurred.

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