From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Baldin v. Friedman

Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District
Dec 15, 1938
29 Cal.App.2d 663 (Cal. Ct. App. 1938)

Opinion

Docket No. 2408.

December 15, 1938.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Riverside County denying a preliminary injunction. Appeal dismissed on motion.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

No appearance for Appellant.

A. Heber Winder for Respondents.


Respondents have moved to dismiss this appeal, supported by the certificate of the county clerk from which it appears that an order denying a preliminary injunction was entered on August 7, 1936; that written notice of entry of that order was served on July 29, 1938; that notice of appeal was filed on August 7, 1936; that no notice to prepare a transcript on appeal has been made or filed; that no proposed bill of exceptions has been filed; that no proceeding for the preparation of a record on appeal is pending in the trial court, and that the time to institute such a proceeding has expired.

[1] More than two years elapsed between the time notice of appeal was filed and the time notice was given of a motion to dismiss, and no appearance was made on behalf of the appellant when the motion to dismiss came on for hearing. Under these circumstances the motion to dismiss should be granted. ( Rees v. Roberts, 24 Cal.App. (2d) 69 [ 74 P.2d 296].)

The appeal is dismissed.

Marks, J., and Griffin, J., concurred.


Summaries of

Baldin v. Friedman

Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District
Dec 15, 1938
29 Cal.App.2d 663 (Cal. Ct. App. 1938)
Case details for

Baldin v. Friedman

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE P. BALDIN, Appellant, v. CARL FRIEDMAN et al., Respondents

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District

Date published: Dec 15, 1938

Citations

29 Cal.App.2d 663 (Cal. Ct. App. 1938)
85 P.2d 521