Martin

Martin v. Sterling Grocery Co.

Good Law
1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 924·96 Cal. App. 630·274 P. 605
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 6, 1929Docket No. 6428.California732 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Crail, J.

The motion to dismiss is made upon the ground that appellant has failed to file a transcript of the record and her points and authorities within the time prescribed by law and the rules of this court, and the motion is based upon the certificate of the county clerk and various affidavits showing such default. Appellant admits her default but seeks relief under the provisions of section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the grounds of inadvertence and excusable neglect. (Goldberg v. Davis, 76 Cal. App. 489 [ 244 Pac. 952 ]; City Properties Co. v. Bond & Finance Corp., 195 Cal. 566 [ 234 Pac. 1112 ].)

The affidavit of appellant’s attorney shows that the action is for damages for personal injuries; that the trial resulted in a judgment for defendants, and that in due time appellant gave notice of appeal and the next day, or August 30, 1928, notified the clerk to prepare a transcript on appeal, and on the same day he notified one of the stenographic reporters of said trial that he had given the notices above indicated and requested said reporter to consult with another reporter of said trial, and ascertain the approximate cost of a transcript and' to notify affiant's office,…

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.