Perkins

Attention was called to the fact so briefly, and in such an incidental way, at the original hearing, that it escaped our notice; but upon rehearing, it is made manifest to us that there is nothing before us, in this cause, which we have jurisdiction to hear and determine.

A money judgment was rendered in the cause October 31, 1888. Notice of appeal was served and filed December 26th of the same year. No undertaking on appeal ivas ever filed or waived. The appeal was therefore “ ineffectual for any purpose.” (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 940; Holcomb v. Sawyer, 51 Cal. 417 ; Boyd v. Burrel, 60 Cal. 281 ; Biagi v. Howes, 63 Cal. 384 ; Brown v. Green, 65 Cal. 222 ; Stratton v. Graham, 68 Cal. 168 ; Little v. Jacks, 68 Cal. 344 , 345; Duffy v. Greenebaum, 72 Cal. 159 ; Estate of *244 Skerrett, 80 Cal. 63 ; Schurtz v. Romer, 81 Cal. 245 .) The appeal being ineffectual for any purpose, there has been and is no case here for our determination.

Attached to the transcript which has been filed herein, there is a stipulation, entitled in this court, agreeing to the correctness of the transcript, and stating that a good and sufficient undertaking on appeal has been duly executed and filed. It is…