Stevinson

San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. Stevinson

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 235·1911 Cal. App. LEXIS 149·116 P. 378
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 10, 1911Civ. No. 857.California1,785 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Hart, J.

This is a motion to dismiss the appeal of plaintiff herein.

The ground of the motion is that, having prepared its record on appeal in accordance with the provisions of sections 953a, 953b and 953c of the Code of Civil Procedure, the appellant failed to file, within thirty days after the filing of the transcript, a brief wherein were printed “such portions of the record as the appellant desires to call to the attention of the court.” (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 953c.)

The contention is that said section contemplates that the appellant must print in his brief so much of the evidence or other portions of the record as may be necessary to make clear and present fairly and lucidly before the appellate court the legal points upon which he relies for a reversal, and the appellant here having failed to do as thus required, this court should incontinently refuse to consider its appeal.

But, considering that the alternative system of taking appeals in civil cases as prescribed by the sections mentioned is comparatively a new innovation on the appellate practice and procedure as it existed for many years, and, in view of the fact that there has been no definite rule established for the…

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.