Seaboard Surety Corp. v. Hollywood State Bank

60 P.2d 876, 16 Cal. App. 2d 757
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal
DecidedSeptember 11, 1936
DocketCiv. No. 11149
StatusPublished

This text of 60 P.2d 876 (Seaboard Surety Corp. v. Hollywood State Bank) 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
Seaboard Surety Corp. v. Hollywood State Bank, 60 P.2d 876, 16 Cal. App. 2d 757 (Cal. Ct. App. 1936).

Opinion

CRAIL, P. J.

This case comes before us upon the respondent’s motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground [758]*758that the notice of appeal was not filed within the time required by law, the contention being that appellant was a day late, and that contention depending in turn on when the order of the trial court was entered in the minutes. The case is very similar to the case of Berman v. Blankenship Motors, 140 Cal. App. 134 [34 Pac. (2d) 1035], and on the authority of that case the motion is denied.

Wood, J., and Gould, J., pro tem,, concurred.

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

Related

Berman v. Blankenship Motors
34 P.2d 1035 (California Court of Appeal, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 P.2d 876, 16 Cal. App. 2d 757, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seaboard-surety-corp-v-hollywood-state-bank-calctapp-1936.