Scott v. Breusing
LOUISE ELIZABETH SCOTT, Appellant, v. MARY BREUSING, Respondent
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Charles R. Barnard (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Barnard
BARNARD, P. J.
This is a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that no record has been prepared or filed within the time provided by law.
From the certificate of the county clerk and an affidavit of the court reporter it appears that the judgment appealed from was entered on October 21, 1938; that a motion for a new trial was denied on December 12, 1938; that a notice of the denial of said motion was served and filed on the same day; that notice of appeal and request for a transcript on appeal was filed on December 21, 1938; that no arrangement was made with the court reporter covering the cost of a transcript and no undertaking was filed in accordance with the provisions of section 953b of the Code of Civil Procedure; that no draft of a bill of exceptions was filed within the time allowed by section 650 of the Code of Civil Procedure; and that no proceedings are now pending in the superior court for the settlement of a bill of exceptions or for the settlement of a transcript.
The motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed.
Marks, J., and Griffin, J., concurred.