From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matthai v. Kennedy

Supreme Court of California,In Bank
Feb 12, 1906
148 Cal. 699 (Cal. 1906)

Opinion

S.F. No. 4335.

February 12, 1906.

MOTION to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County dismissing an action. F.B. Ogden, Judge.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Louise Matthai, and Clara S. Foltz, for Appellant.

Dudley Kinsell, for Respondent.


Plaintiff's action was dismissed on August 26, 1904, an order to that effect being entered upon the minutes of the court, as provided by section 581 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Subsequently, upon the twenty-third day of February, 1905, the clerk entered a judgment of dismissal. Plaintiff's appeal was taken within six months from the last-named date, but more than six months from the entry of the minute order. Defendant moves to dismiss the appeal upon this ground, and the motion must be granted. It is well settled by our decisions that the entry of the order of dismissal in the minute-book of the court, being declared by the statute to be "effective for all purposes," is in its nature a final judgment, and from the date of that entry the time within which an appeal may be taken begins to run. (Marks v. Keenan, 140 Cal. 33, [ 73 P. 751]; Pacific Pav. Co. v. Vizelich, 141 Cal. 4, [ 74 P. 352]; Swortfiguer v. White, 141 Cal. 579, [ 75 P. 172].)

As this appeal was not taken within the time limited by law, it must be dismissed; and it is so ordered.


Summaries of

Matthai v. Kennedy

Supreme Court of California,In Bank
Feb 12, 1906
148 Cal. 699 (Cal. 1906)
Case details for

Matthai v. Kennedy

Case Details

Full title:LOUISE MATTHAI, Appellant, v. GEORGE E. KENNEDY, Administrator etc.…

Court:Supreme Court of California,In Bank

Date published: Feb 12, 1906

Citations

148 Cal. 699 (Cal. 1906)
84 P. 37

Citing Cases

Wood, Curtis & Company v. Missouri Pacific Railway Company

The same has been held as to dismissals under subdivision 7 above referred to. (Pacific Paving Co. v.…

Wilson v. Union Iron Works Dry Dock Company

The entry in the minutes under date of February 10, 1912, was a judgment of nonsuit. (Code Civ. Proc., sec.…