gno.law

Kramm v. Stockton Electric R. R. Co.

California Court of Appeal · Civ. No. 1126. · 1913-09-23 · Published · 136 P. 534 · 22 Cal. App. 761 · 1913 Cal. App. LEXIS 77

CATHERINE KRAMM, as Administratrix of the Estate of Philip Kramm, Deceased, Appellant, v. STOCKTON ELECTRIC RAILROAD COMPANY (A Corporation), Respondent

Proceeding
appeal from an order
Trial court
Superior Court of San Joaquin County
Trial judge
J. A. Plummer
Outcome
other — The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. [Civ. No.
Area
civil
Panel
Hart (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 — Hart

HART, J.

This is an appeal from an order relieving the defendant from its alleged default in failing to prepare and serve, within the time prescribed by law, its proposed bill of exceptions. The proceeding was had under section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and the ground upon which the 'order was asked for and allowed was that the alleged default of the defendant was due to inadvertence and excusable neglect.

As is shown in Kramm etc.

v. Stockton Electric R. R. Co., Civil No. 1115, ante, p. 737, [136 Pac. 523], this day decided, the order appealed from is not one from which an appeal may be taken, and this appeal will, therefore, have to be dismissed. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 963, subd. 2;

Kaltschmidt v. Weber, 136 Cal. 675, [69 Pac. 497].)

*762 The point is, however, reviewed and decided in Civil No. 1115, the action of the court relieving the defendant of its alleged default, together with all the proceedings had therein, being incorporated in the record on the motion for a new trial.

(Kaltschmidt v. Weber, 136 Cal. 675, [69 Pac 497].)

The appeal herein is dismissed.

Chipman, P. J., and Burnett, J., concurred.

Cites, in this corpus

Cited by