San Diego Investment Co. v. Crane

California Court of Appeal

San Diego Investment Co. v. Crane

180 P. 837, 40 Cal. App. 393, 1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 25

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedMarch 21, 1919

DocketCiv. No. 2877.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 180 P. 837 (San Diego Investment Co. v. Crane) 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

San Diego Investment Co. v. Crane, 180 P. 837, 40 Cal. App. 393, 1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 25 (Cal. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

FINLAYSON, P. J.

The appeal is from “the judgment entered in the above-entitled court on the fourth day of February, A. D. 1916.” We have searched through the record in vain to find such a judgment, or, indeed, any judgment. There is none.

We do not know to what appellant' refers when, in its notice of appeal, it says it “hereby appeals . . . from the judgment entered ... on the fourth day of February, A. D. 1916, ’ ’ unless it be the findings and conclusions of law, which, for some unaccountable reason, bear the indorsement, “Entered February 4th, 1916. ’ ’ [1] These, however, do not constitute a judgment. (Miller v. Sharpe, 54 Cal. 590 ; Thompson v. Lynch, 43 Cal. 482.) The clerk’s certificate certifies that “the foregoing transcript on appeal is correct and contains a true copy of the judgment-roll in the action.” In the absence of anything to the contrary, we must assume that the clerk’s certificate states the truth; if it does, then the transcript “contains a true copy of the judgment-roll.” [2] Since no judgment appears in the judgment-roll as printed in the transcript, the only possible conclusion is that, as yet, no judgment has been given or made. There is therefore nothing from which to appeal, and the appeal should be dismissed. (Miller v. Sharpe, supra.)

Appeal dismissed.

Sloane, J., and Thomas, J., concurred.

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

FINLAYSON, P. J.

The appeal is from “the judgment entered in the above-entitled court on the fourth day of February, A. D. 1916.” We have searched through the record in vain to find such a judgment, or, indeed, any judgment. There is none.

We do not know to what appellant' refers when, in its notice of appeal, it says it “hereby appeals . . . from the judgment entered ... on the fourth day of February, A. D. 1916, ’ ’ unless it be the findings and conclusions of law, which, for some unaccountable reason, bear the indorsement, “Entered February 4th, 1916. ’ ’ [1] These, however, do not constitute a judgment. (Miller v. Sharpe, 54 Cal. 590 ; Thompson v. Lynch, 43 Cal. 482.) The clerk’s certificate certifies that “the foregoing transcript on appeal is correct and contains a true copy of the judgment-roll in the action.” In the absence of anything to the contrary, we must assume that the clerk’s certificate states the truth; if it does, then the transcript “contains a true copy of the judgment-roll.” [2] Since no judgment appears in the judgment-roll as printed in the transcript, the only possible conclusion is that, as yet, no judgment has been given or made. There is therefore nothing from which to appeal, and the appeal should be dismissed. (Miller v. Sharpe, supra.)

Appeal dismissed.

Sloane, J., and Thomas, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

180 P. 837, 40 Cal. App. 393, 1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/san-diego-investment-co-v-crane-calctapp-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack