Rothrock v. Baldwin

California Supreme Court

Rothrock v. Baldwin

91 P. 1014, 7 Cal. Unrep. 338, 1907 Cal. App. LEXIS 338

DecidedAugust 20, 1907

StatusPublished

This text of 91 P. 1014 (Rothrock v. Baldwin) 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.

Bluebook

Rothrock v. Baldwin, 91 P. 1014, 7 Cal. Unrep. 338, 1907 Cal. App. LEXIS 338 (Cal. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

ALLEN, P. J.

This is a proceeding in mandamus commenced by plaintiff to obtain an order of the superior court commanding defendant Downs, as president of the board of trustees, and defendant Baldwin, as clerk of the city of Long Beach, to draw, sign, countersign, and deliver a certain warrant on account of labor done and performed by plaintiff for said city at its request, which payment had not theretofore been made. A demurrer was interposed to the petition and overruled. The cause was subsequently tried upon its merits, findings of fact and conclusions of law filed and judgment entered in favor of plaintiff. From the judgment so entered this appeal is taken.

-The transcript on appeal was filed November 2, 1906. Stipulations were filed for an extension of time within which appellants should file points and authorities. This time expired in December, 1906, and no points or authorities have ever been filed in the case.

An examination of the record suggests no error, and, our attention being called to none, the judgment is ordered affirmed.

We concur: Shaw, J.; Taggart, J.

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

ALLEN, P. J.

This is a proceeding in mandamus commenced by plaintiff to obtain an order of the superior court commanding defendant Downs, as president of the board of trustees, and defendant Baldwin, as clerk of the city of Long Beach, to draw, sign, countersign, and deliver a certain warrant on account of labor done and performed by plaintiff for said city at its request, which payment had not theretofore been made. A demurrer was interposed to the petition and overruled. The cause was subsequently tried upon its merits, findings of fact and conclusions of law filed and judgment entered in favor of plaintiff. From the judgment so entered this appeal is taken.

-The transcript on appeal was filed November 2, 1906. Stipulations were filed for an extension of time within which appellants should file points and authorities. This time expired in December, 1906, and no points or authorities have ever been filed in the case.

An examination of the record suggests no error, and, our attention being called to none, the judgment is ordered affirmed.

We concur: Shaw, J.; Taggart, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 P. 1014, 7 Cal. Unrep. 338, 1907 Cal. App. LEXIS 338, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rothrock-v-baldwin-cal-1907.