From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Butler v. Soule

Supreme Court of California
Jun 9, 1897
117 Cal. 226 (Cal. 1897)

Opinion

         Department One

         Hearing In Bank Denied.

         Motion in the Supreme Court to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco.

         COUNSEL:

         Robert Ash, for Appellants.

          Joseph Hutchinson, for Respondent.


         OPINION

         THE COURT          Judgment in this action was entered by default April 6, 1896. January 29, 1897, a motion to set aside the judgment was made on behalf of the defendants, and was denied February 15th. April 5th an appeal was taken from the judgment, and also from the order denying the motion to set it aside. No transcript having been filed in this court, the respondent, on May 22d, gave notice of the present motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment for failure to file a [49 P. 6] transcript within forty days after the appeal was taken. In reply thereto the appellant has filed an affidavit, from which it appears that at the time the notice of the motion was served there was pending before the judge for settlement a bill of exceptions upon the order denying the motion to vacate the judgment.

         Rule II of this court requires the appellant to file a transcript of the record to be used upon the appeal "within forty days after the appeal is perfected and the bill of exceptions and the statement (if there be any) are settled." The practice is common, and is recognized by this court, when several appeals in the same action can be reviewed upon a single record, whether such appeals are taken separately or by the same notice, to file a single transcript upon which all of the appeals may be considered. This practice does not, however, obviate the necessity of complying with the above rule. The bill of exceptions therein referred to is that which is applicable to the matter appealed from (Buckley v. Althorf , 86 Cal. 643); and when an appeal from the judgment is taken at the same time with an appeal from an order made after judgment, although both appeals may be considered upon the same transcript, the time for filing the transcript upon the appeal from the judgment is not extended until the settlement of a bill of exceptions taken upon the order appealed from.

         The appeal from the judgment is dismissed.


Summaries of

Butler v. Soule

Supreme Court of California
Jun 9, 1897
117 Cal. 226 (Cal. 1897)
Case details for

Butler v. Soule

Case Details

Full title:JOHN W. BUTLER, Respondent, v. A. C. SOULE et al., Appellants

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jun 9, 1897

Citations

117 Cal. 226 (Cal. 1897)
49 P. 5

Citing Cases

Sampath v. Concurrent Technologies Corp.

Winterscheidt also noted that although Plaintiff had the ability to "perform manufacturing cost analysis," he…

State ex rel. Red Lodge-Rosebud Irrigation District v. District Court

One who has been denied the right to intervene may appeal from the judgment. ( Dollenmayer v. Pryor, 150 Cal.…