From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wiseman v. Sklar

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division One
Feb 4, 1929
96 Cal.App. 610 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929)

Opinion

Docket No. 5770.

February 4, 1929.

MOTION to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Frank C. Collier, Judge. Motion denied.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Edward Brody for Plaintiff and Appellant Kass.

Fred W. Morrison, Andriani Haines and John L. Bisher, Jr., for Defendants and Appellants.

William Ellis Lady for Respondent.


[1] Motion by respondent (who was one of the plaintiffs in the lower court) to dismiss appeal taken by one of the appellants (who also was a plaintiff in the lower court) on the ground that said appellant, having assigned his interest in the judgment to the respondent, is no longer interested in the result of the appeal. However, since it appears that the assignment in question was not made by such appellant personally and voluntarily, but that in consequence of an order of the trial court such assignment was made in behalf of said appellant by the clerk of the court; and since the outcome of the appeal is uncertain, it is clear that said appellant, notwithstanding his involuntary assignment of the judgment, may still be pecuniarily interested in the litigation.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.

York, J., and Crail, J., pro tem., concurred.


Summaries of

Wiseman v. Sklar

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division One
Feb 4, 1929
96 Cal.App. 610 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929)
Case details for

Wiseman v. Sklar

Case Details

Full title:E.C. WISEMAN, Plaintiff and Respondent; SIDNEY J. KASS, Plaintiff and…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division One

Date published: Feb 4, 1929

Citations

96 Cal.App. 610 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929)
274 P. 764