Romine

Romine v. Cralle

Good Law
1890 Cal. LEXIS 701·83 Cal. 432·23 P. 525
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 13, 1890No. 13117California1,569 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Works, J.

J. — Several appeals have been taken in this case by the defendant Hirschler, one of which is still pending, the others having been dismissed. (Romine v. Cralle, 80 Cal. 626 .)

On the twenty-fifth day of April, 1889, the attorney for said Hirschler filed in this court a petition for leave to file a stay-bond, and for an order of stay, in which it was alleged, in substance, that a bond had been given in the court below, but that for technical reasons the judge of that court had declined to receive the justification of the sureties or approve the bond. At the time this application was made, there were at least two appeals pending, one from the judgment, and one from the order denjúng a new trial. It is also claimed by the respondent in this proceeding that there had been two appeals from the judgment, and that, because the first was undisposed of, the second one, which was the one relied upon by the appellant, and the one then being prosecuted by him, was void. The petition for leave to file a stay-bond did not designate in which appeal it was desired to file the same, but it was recited as a fact that an appeal from the order denying a new trial had been taken, and that 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.