Joos

St. Clair v. Joos

Good Law
1924 Cal. App. LEXIS 519·66 Cal. App. 398·226 P. 623
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 1924Civ. No. 4691.California1,782 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Craig, J.

Judgment having been given for the plaintiff and respondent in a suit in unlawful detainer, the defendant appealed and furnished undertaking for an attempted stay of execution, and the sureties thereon justified pursuant to notice. About six months later respondent moved the court for an order to require a new bond upon the ground that the sureties had become insufficient, and such order being granted, new sureties were furnished, but after several continuances of the hearing failed to qualify.

Appellant contends that execution was stayed, and here seeks a supersedeas, contending (1) that the sureties tendered on the new undertaking should have been accepted upon the showing made in the court below, and that this court ought to approve such undertaking; or (2) that ap pellant having shown good faith, she is entitled to have execution stayed upon furnishing another undertaking, and that if afforded the opportunity to do so, she can obtain bondsmen capable of justifying in the amount required.

The issues were tried and judgment entered thereon March 28, 1923, by Honorable F. M. Jamison of Modoc County, and on May 25th, Honorable L. H. Valentine of Los Angeles County made an order…

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.