Whiting-Mead Com. Co. v. Richards

California Court of Appeal

Whiting-Mead Com. Co. v. Richards

180 P. 633, 40 Cal. App. 266, 1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 48

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedMarch 13, 1919

DocketCiv. No. 2071. Second Appellate District, Division Two.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 180 P. 633 (Whiting-Mead Com. Co. v. Richards) 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

Whiting-Mead Com. Co. v. Richards, 180 P. 633, 40 Cal. App. 266, 1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 48 (Cal. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an appeal by all the above-named plaintiffs, except G. S. Umpleby, who has dismissed the appeal, so far as his interests are concerned, from an amended judgment entered on February 9, 1916, in which the trial court found that the interest of Nellie D. Richards in certain land was not subject to certain liens, etc.

The appeal is by the alternative method, and on the clerk's transcript alone.

[1] The exact condition of the record here is, as was said in the case of Welk v. Sorensen et al., 179 Cal. 604, [178 P. 498]; "Appellant neither prints any of the record in the brief, nor designates in any way the parts of the transcript upon which the alleged 'Statement of Facts' is based. We will not, therefore, consider the brief."

By virtue of the rule followed in that case this court will not consider the briefs here.

Judgment affirmed.

Finlayson, P. J., and Sloane, J., concurred.

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