Pio

Pio v. Aigeltinger

Good Law
1892 Cal. LEXIS 762·97 Cal. 81·31 P. 895
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 27, 1892No. 15097California651 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Paterson, J.

The defendant appealed from the judgment of the superior court on November 19, 1891. On June 17/1892, he procured an order granting him fifteen days from the last-named date within which to serve and file his transcript. On July 8, 1892, the respondent served a notice of motion to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that no transcript had been filed, and that the time for filing the same had elapsed. The transcript was filed on July 13, 1892. At the hearing *82 of the motion, counsel for the appellant objected to the -sufficiency of the certificate of the clerk presented by '.the respondent. No ruling was made on the objection, but counsel for respondent stated that he would file ^another certificate. The appellant objected to the filing •of any additional certificate, claiming that the motion -must be determined upon the certificate on file. On -the following day, this court, regarding the certificate filed as sufficient, and the appellant without excuse for the delay, granted the motion to dismiss. Thereafter ¡the appellant filed and served a notice of motion to set aside the order dismissing the appeal, on the grounds 'that the first certificate was insufficient, that before 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.