gno.law

Thrasher v. Thrasher

California Court of Appeal · Civ. 2331 · 1939-05-10 · Published · 32 Cal. App. 2d 610 · 90 P.2d 365 · 1939 Cal. App. LEXIS 406

HARRIET M. THRASHER, Appellant, v. MARY E. THRASHER Et Al., Respondents

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.

Motion by respondent to dismiss appeal ' on the ground that no transcript has been filed and that proceedings for the preparation of a record have been terminated in the trial court.

From the certificate of the county clerk it appears that judgment was entered on February 21, 1.938; that a motion for a new trial was denied on April 25, 1938; that notice to the clerk to prepare a transcript was filed on May 31, 1938; that no further steps have been taken by the appellant since said date with respect to preparing a record; that on February 26, 1939, on motion, an order was made in the trial court terminating any proceedings for the preparation of a record; that no proceedings for the preparation of a bill of exceptions or of a transcript are now pending before said court; and that the time therefor has expired. The motion must, therefore, be granted.

(Bruce v. Tunstall, 24 Cal. App. (2d) 370 [75 Pac. (2d) 120];

Christensen v. Couey, 136 Cal. App. 268 [28 Pac. (2d) 689].)

The appeal is dismissed.

Marks, J., and Griffin, J., concurred.

Cites, in this corpus