Olinger v. Pacific Greyhound Lines
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Marks (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
18 Cal.App.2d 104 (1936) ANNIE OLINGER et al., Appellants, v. PACIFIC GREYHOUND LINES (a Corporation), Respondent.
Civ. No. 2002. California Court of Appeals. Fourth Appellate District.
December 10, 1936. No appearance for Appellants.
Wright, Monroe, Thomas & Glenn for Respondent.
Marks, J.
This is a motion to dismiss the appeal under the provisions of rule V of the Rules for the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal.
[1] The certificate of the county clerk of San Diego County shows that judgment was entered on February 15, 1936; that motion for new trial was denied on April 18, 1936, and notice given on April 22, 1936; that notice of appeal was filed May 29, 1936; that no proceedings are pending for preparation of a transcript nor settlement of a bill of exceptions.
No transcript has been filed here and no appearance made by appellant.
The appeal is dismissed.
Barnard, P. J., and Jennings, J., concurred.
Cites, in this corpus
- Olinger v. Pacific Greyhound Lines Civ. No. 2002 · 1936-12-10
Cited by
- Wright v. Wright Civ. No. 2617 · 1941-02-14
- Wright v. Wright Civ. No. 2617 · 1941-02-14
- Bujulian v. Consolidated Irrigation District Civ. No. 2535 · 1940-02-14
- Batchelder v. MacKay Civ. No. 2100 · 1938-08-12