Barnett

Barnett v. Marsili

Good Law
122 Cal. App. 609·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 1046·10 P.2d 472
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 16, 1932Docket No. 781.California415 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Barnard, J.

This is an application to correct an alleged error in the reporter’s transcript involving only one question and answer, which now read as follows:

In support of the motion, there was filed the affidavit of the official court reporter to the effect that he took down the testimony of the witnesses at the trial in shorthand and thereafter transcribed the same; that in transcribing the question and answer above referred to, he incorrectly transcribed it as first above given; that the correct transcription of this question and answer is in accordance with the correction above set forth; and that in order for this transcript to correctly state the testimony given, the same must be amended and corrected as above indicated. In further support of the motion, there is presented the approval of the trial judge to the correction asked for.

In opposition to the motion, it is not denied that the transcript as filed fails to set forth correctly the testimony as given in the trial court, but it is urged that this court is without authority to correct such an error; that the respondent’s only avenue of relief was to apply in seasonable time for such relief under section 473 of the Code of Civil…

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.