Schroder v. Schmidt

California Supreme Court

Schroder v. Schmidt

12 P. 302, 71 Cal. 399, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 599

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 13, 1886

DocketNo. 9812

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 12 P. 302 (Schroder v. Schmidt) 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

Schroder v. Schmidt, 12 P. 302, 71 Cal. 399, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 599 (Cal. 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

Sharpstein, J.

Respondent moves to have the appeals from the judgment and the order denying the motion for a new trial dismissed on the ground that the appeals were taken before the judgment was entered. That is doubtless a sufficient ground for dismissing the [400]*400appeal from the judgment. (McLaughlin v. Doherty, 54 Cal. 519; Thomas v. Anderson, 55 Cal. 43.) But the appeal from the order denying the motion for a new trial was taken within sixty days after the order was made. That is within the time prescribed by the code. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 939.) We think no sufficient ground for dismissing the appeal from the order denying the motion for a new trial has been shown in this case, and the motion to dismiss that appeal is denied.

Appeal from the judgment dismissed.

Thornton, J., McKinstry, J., Myrick, J., Morrison, C. J., and McKee, J., concurred.

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

Sharpstein, J.

Respondent moves to have the appeals from the judgment and the order denying the motion for a new trial dismissed on the ground that the appeals were taken before the judgment was entered. That is doubtless a sufficient ground for dismissing the [400]*400appeal from the judgment. (McLaughlin v. Doherty, 54 Cal. 519; Thomas v. Anderson, 55 Cal. 43.) But the appeal from the order denying the motion for a new trial was taken within sixty days after the order was made. That is within the time prescribed by the code. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 939.) We think no sufficient ground for dismissing the appeal from the order denying the motion for a new trial has been shown in this case, and the motion to dismiss that appeal is denied.

Appeal from the judgment dismissed.

Thornton, J., McKinstry, J., Myrick, J., Morrison, C. J., and McKee, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 P. 302, 71 Cal. 399, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schroder-v-schmidt-cal-1886.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack