Pacific Power Co. v. State

Good Law
31 Cal. App. 719·162 P. 641
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 19, 1916Civ. No 1463; Civ. 1460, 1461, 1462California1,299 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

A motion has been made to dismiss the appeal in each of the above-entitled causes. The facts are identical and the cases may be considered together. The motion is made upon the grounds: “ (1) That the said defendant and appellant is not a ‘party aggrieved’ by the judgment in this case within the provisions of section 938 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the state of California. (2) That the said defendant and appellant has failed to comply with the provisions of rule II, subdivision 4 of the rules of this court in that it has failed to file its printed points and authorities within the period prescribed.”

As to the first point, it may be said that the state of California was the only party against whom the action was brought, except certain fictitious parties, and it is the only party against whom a judgment was obtained, said judgment being “that the plaintiff is entitled to judgment in its favor herein as prayed for in its complaint herein, and that it be adjudged and decreed in and by said judgment that the corporation plaintiff pay as compensation and damages to the said defendant, the state of California, for the land herein sought to be condemned, the sum of twelve hundred…

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.