Seney

Seney v. Pickwick Stages Northern Division, Inc.

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 203·88 Cal. App. 284·263 P. 299
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 10, 1928Docket No. 5738.California1,051 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Houser, J.

This matter involves two separate motions, the first of which being a motion to dismiss an appeal and the second being a motion to affirm the judgment rendered in the lower court.

In part, the ground specified in each of such motions is identical with the other and consists of a contention on the part of respondent to the effect that the record on appeal was not certified by the shorthand reporter, or settled by the judge before whom the cause was tried. In the motion to dismiss the appeal the additional ground is specified that the reporter’s transcript was ‘not filed “within the time required by law.”

As affecting the ground last stated, Rule V of the supreme court and district courts of appeal contains the following:

Although the register in the clerk’s office discloses facts from which it may be concluded that the reporter’s transcript was not originally filed “within the time required by law,” it appears that the transcript was on file at the time the notice to dismiss the appeal was given. It follows that respondent may not avail itself of appellant’s dereliction in the first instance.

With reference to the grounds that the reporter’s transcript was not properly…

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.