In re Berlin Dye Works & Laundry Co.

Good Law
225 F. 683·1915 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1305
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJuly 6, 1915No. 1367California646 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Triplet, J.

C. K. Douglas brought suit against the Berlin Dye Works & Laundry Company, in the superior court of California, for injuries to his person resulting from a tort. He obtained judgment against the defendant, and the defendant appealed therefrom without giving a supersedeas bond. Thereafter an involuntary petition in bankruptcy was filed, and the defendant was declared a bankrupt. Douglas presented a claim against the bankrupt estate for allowance, based upon said judgment, while the appeal was pending. Whether the claimant's judgment is provable depends upon whether or not it is a final judgment.

Section 942 of the Code of Civil Procedure of California provides that, if the appeal he from a judgment or order directing the payment of money, such as this judgment is, it does not stay the execution of the judgment unless a bond is given for said purpose. It has been held by the Supreme Court of California that, during the time allowed *684 for an appeal, and while an appeal is pending from a judgment, it cannot be introduced in evidence, and the statute of limitations does not run against a suit thereon. Feeney v. Hinckley, 134 Cal. 467 , 66 Pac. 580 , 86 Am. St. Rep. 290 . This case…

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.