From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Caney v. Silverthorne

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1858
9 Cal. 67 (Cal. 1858)

Opinion

         Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District.

         COUNSEL:

         McDougall & Sharp, for Appellant.

          Shafter, Park & Shafter, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Burnett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Terry, C. J., concurring.

         OPINION

          BURNETT, Judge

         The defendant having failed to give notice of his intention to move for a new trial, or to file his statement within the time limited by the statute, lost his right to move for a new trial. (Pr. Act, Sec. 195.)

         There is no statement on appeal; the statement for new trial not having been filed in time, is not properly a part of the record. We can only look at the judgment-roll; which, being regular on its face, judgment is affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Caney v. Silverthorne

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1858
9 Cal. 67 (Cal. 1858)
Case details for

Caney v. Silverthorne

Case Details

Full title:CANEY v. SILVERTHORNE

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jan 1, 1858

Citations

9 Cal. 67 (Cal. 1858)

Citing Cases

Yenawine v. Richter

Failing to file the statement within five days after the filing of the notice, they lost their right to move…

Mahoney v. Caperton

The notice of motion for new trial being too late, is void. (Caney v. Silverthorne, 9 Cal. 67 .) The…