Sneath v. Waterman

California Supreme Court

Sneath v. Waterman

28 P. 1061, 3 Cal. Unrep. 483

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 12, 1892

DocketNo. 14,860

StatusPublished

This text of 28 P. 1061 (Sneath v. Waterman) 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

Sneath v. Waterman, 28 P. 1061, 3 Cal. Unrep. 483 (Cal. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The affidavit of service' upon the adverse attorney of the notice of motion to dismiss the appeal herein does not show that any attempt was made to serve him at his office between the hours of 8 o’clock A. M. and 6 o’clock P. M. of the day when the notice was left at his residence. The motion to dismiss is denied, without prejudice.

Harrison, J., being disqualified, took no part in the decision of the above motion.

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

PER CURIAM.

The affidavit of service' upon the adverse attorney of the notice of motion to dismiss the appeal herein does not show that any attempt was made to serve him at his office between the hours of 8 o’clock A. M. and 6 o’clock P. M. of the day when the notice was left at his residence. The motion to dismiss is denied, without prejudice.

Harrison, J., being disqualified, took no part in the decision of the above motion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 P. 1061, 3 Cal. Unrep. 483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sneath-v-waterman-cal-1892.