Whipley v. Mills

9 Cal. 641
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1858
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 9 Cal. 641 (Whipley v. Mills) 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
Whipley v. Mills, 9 Cal. 641 (Cal. 1858).

Opinion

Burnett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Field, J., concurring.

The judgment in this case was rendered on the 29th March, 1852. Notice of appeal filed in the Clerk’s office April 15th, 1852, and transcript on appeal filed in this Court June 17th, 1857. The record contains no evidence that a copy of the notice was served upon the appellee, as required by the 337th section of the Code.

The appeal is made by filing and serving the notice. Both requisites must exist to complete the appeal. If either could be omitted, it would be the filing of the notice. A failure to notify the other party is more material than a failure to file in the Clerk’s office. No copy of the notice having been served upon the appellee, he had no opportunity to move to dismiss the appeal. The result was that the transcript is made out and sent up more than five years after filing the notice of appeal. (Franklin v. Reiner, 8 Cal. R., 340.)

The appeal must be dismissed.

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

Related

Tucker v. Brown
150 P.2d 604 (Washington Supreme Court, 1944)
Candelas v. Ramírez
20 P.R. 31 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1914)
Centro de Detallistas v. Vicente
17 P.R. 846 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1911)
Centro de Detallistas de San Juan v. A. Vicente & Co.
17 P.R. Dec. 881 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1911)
Seattle, Lake Shore & Eastern Railway Co. v. Simpson
54 P. 29 (Washington Supreme Court, 1898)
Tootle v. French
25 P. 1091 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1891)
Pardee v. Murray
4 Mont. 35 (Montana Supreme Court, 1881)
Opening of Gold Street v. Newton
2 Dakota 39 (Supreme Court of Dakota, 1878)
Hastings v. Halleck
10 Cal. 31 (California Supreme Court, 1858)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 Cal. 641, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whipley-v-mills-cal-1858.