McDonald

McDonald v. McConkey

Good Law
54 Cal. 143
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJuly 1, 1880No. 6,631California360 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Departmentthornton, J.

In this cause, the respondent, by his attorney, J. R. Palmer, Esq., moves to dismiss the appeal and strike the transcript from the files, on the grounds that the attorney (A. H. Griffith) who signed, filed, and served the notice of appeal, and filed and served the transcript herein, was not, at the time of so doing, the attorney of record for the defendant and appellant, and was not, therefore, competent to give such notice or take an appeal in the cause.

There appears in the transcript, at the end thereof, a certificate, signed by A. H. Griffith, as attorney for- appellant, and J. R. Palmer, as attorney for respondent, to the effect that the persons above named, as attorneys for the plaintiff and defendant, certify that the foregoing transcript embraces a full, true, and correct copy of the judgment roll, notice of motion for new trial, notice of motion to dismiss motion for new trial, order dismissing the same, notice of appeal, and that an undertaking on appeal in due form has been duly filed.

We are inclined to the opinion that Mr. Griffith was competent to give the notice of appeal, and to take an appeal in the cause, for the reason that an appeal, like a writ of error, is…

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.