Garner

Garner v. Meizel

Good Law
1913 Cal. App. LEXIS 25·22 Cal. App. 256·133 P. 1165
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 7, 1913Civ. No. 1089.California742 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Chipman, J.

The cause was tried by the court without a jury and plaintiff had judgment. The judgment was entered on November 18, 1912, and, on the same day, at the request of attorney for defendant, the court ordered: “That a stay of execution be granted and that 30 days be granted for perfecting an appeal.” It further appears that thereafter, to wit, on the sixth day of December, 1912, defendant filed with the clerk of the said court a notice stating that defendant “desired and intended to appeal from the judgment of the said court in the said matter, and requesting a transcript of the testimony offered or taken, ... as provided by section 953a of the Code of Civil Procedure of the state of California be prepared.” The court made the requested order on December 12, 1912, and the reporter’s transcript was filed with the clerk and presented to the judge of said court for approval 'and settlement. Plaintiff’s attorneys ob jected to the settlement of the transcript on the ground that the notice requesting the transcript was not made within the ten days’ time mentioned in section 953a of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the court had no authority to extend the time; and on the further ground that…

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.