Muller

Muller v. Tanner

Good Law
2 Cal. App. 3d 438·82 Cal. Rptr. 734
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 9, 196925570California2,629 words

Opinion

Opinion

Plaintiff has purported to appeal from a minute order entitled "Order Striking File From Court Records and Directing That No Further Proceedings Be Had." (1) The order, which is set forth below, operated to remove any cause of action which plaintiff had alleged against defendant, and left no issues to be determined between the parties. Although the order was designated as a minute entry, it is in the form of a written order signed by the court and filed in the action. It is, therefore, treated as a judgment of dismissal and as appealable under the law in effect at the time the appeal was taken. (See, Code Civ. Proc., § 581d [1] and former § 963 [cf. present § 904.1, subd. (a)]. Cf. Wilson v. Sharp (1954) 42 Cal.2d 675, 677 [ 268 P.2d 1062 ]; Adohr Milk Farms, Inc. v. Love (1967) 255 Cal. App.2d 366, 370 [ 63 Cal. Rptr. 123 ]; Lerner v. Ehrlich (1963) 222 Cal. App.2d 168, 170-171 [ 35 Cal. Rptr. 106 ] [cross-complaint]; American Can Co. v. City & County of San Francisco (1962) 202 Cal. App.2d 520, 522 [ 21 Cal. Rptr. 33 ]; Himmel v. City Council (1959) 169 Cal. App.2d 97, 98 , fn. [ 336 P.2d 996 ]; and Witczak v. Johnson (1956) 146 Cal. App.2d 599, 601-602 [ 303…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.