Broad

Bay City Building & Loan Ass'n v. Broad

Good Law
128 Cal. 670·1900 Cal. LEXIS 662·61 P. 368
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 7, 1900S.F. No. 2206.California525 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McFARLAND, J.

This case is before us on a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that "appellant has failed to file herein the undertaking on appeal according to law.” The facts are these: An instrument in writing, the body of which is in the proper form of an undertaking on appeal in the case, was filed in due time. Upon this instrument there is a written statement and affidavit signed by Hu Jones and, Louisa F. Hession, in which it is stated, among other things, that they are "the persons named in and who subscribed the foregoing undertaking as the sureties thereto”; but, at the end of the main body of the intended undertaking, at the place where the signatures to such an instrument usually are, there is the signature of Hu J ones alone—Hession not having signed it at that place. On January 30, 1900, before the hearing of the motion to dismiss, appellant filed with the clerk of this court a new undertaking on appeal in due form and properly signed by said Jones and Hession as sureties, and approved by the chief justice, and asked that it be accepted under the provisions of section 954 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

It is not necessary to inquire whether Hession would have been liable on…

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.