Rickert v. Zoeger
Fred Rickert v. E. Zoeger
- Proceeding
- appeal from an order
- Trial court
- Superior Court of Los Angeles County
- Trial judge
- John Perry Wood
- Outcome
- dismissed — The appeal is dismissed.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Shaw (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
The action is to recover a sum of money alleged to be due upon an agreement for the sale of a "saloon business" in the city of Los Angeles.
The notice of appeal states that the plaintiff appeals "from the decision of the superior court rendered in said action, whereby the said court sustains defendant's demurrer to plaintiff's fifth amended complaint without leave to amend." The record does not show that any judgment was entered and it does not contain any other notice of appeal.
An order sustaining or overruling a demurrer is not an appealable order. (Moraga v. Emeric, 4 Cal. 308; Moulton v.Ellmaker, 30 Cal. 529; Agard v. Valencia, 39 Cal. 297; Daniel v.Lansdale, 38 Cal. 567; Hibberd v. Smith, 39 Cal. 146; Ashley v.Olmstead, 54 Cal. 618.) This court is therefore without jurisdiction to act upon the so-called appeal and it must be dismissed.
The appeal is dismissed.
Sloss, J., and Angellotti, C.J., concurred. *Page 400
Cites, in this corpus
- Ashley v. Olmstead No. 6,968 · 1880-07-01
- Hibberd v. Smith No. 2,133 · 1870-07-01
- Agard v. Valencia No. 1,877 · 1870-07-01
- Daniels v. Landsdale · 1869-07-01
- Moulton v. Ellmaker · 1866-10-15
- Moraga v. Emeric · 1854-10-15
Cited by
- Madsen v. Turlock Irrigation District Civ. No. 6642 · 1943-01-21
- In Re Estate of Rawson Civ. No. 4682. · 1924-03-08
- Ham v. County of Los Angeles Civ. No. 3044. · 1920-02-14