Smith v. Trefry

12 P. 351, 71 Cal. 404, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 601
California Supreme Court·Decided December 15, 1886·No. No. 11876·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Myrick, J.

Motion to dismiss appeal.

Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff November 1, 1885. Notice of appeal from the judgment was filed, and served June 18, 1886. No transcript on appeal had been filed, and we have the certificate of the clerk of the court below that the appellant has not requested the clerk to certify to any transcript. Under such circumstances, the motion must be granted.

If, as is stated in a subsequent certificate of the clerk, a motion for new trial is pending in the court below, together with a settlement of a bill of exceptions to be used on such motion, the effect of such proceedings will be considered if an appeal should hereafter be taken from the ruling, when made on the motion for new trial. Until then we must regard the appeal, as the appellant has characterized it, an appeal from the judgment; and no transcript having been filed or prepared within the time prescribed therefor, the appeal is dismissed, but without prejudice.

Sharpstein, J., McKee, J., Morrison, C. J., and Thornton, J., concurred.

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

Smith v. Trefry, 12 P. 351, 71 Cal. 404, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 601 (Cal. 1886).

12 P. 351 (Smith v. Trefry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Corinne Mill, Canal, & Stock Co. v. Johnston
5 Utah 147 (Utah Supreme Court, 1887)