gno.law

Hershey v. Bristol

California Supreme Court · L.A. No. 2654. · 1912-01-29 · Published · 121 P. 871 · 162 Cal. 110 · 1912 Cal. LEXIS 501

MIRA HERSHEY, Respondent v. EMMA R. BRISTOL Et Al., Defendants. JENNIE A. BRISTOL, Appellant

Proceeding
appeal from an order
Trial court
Superior Court of Los Angeles County
Trial judge
Charles Monroe
Outcome
other — The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. [L. A.
Area
civil
Panel
Frederick W. Henshaw (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 — Henshaw

HENSHAW, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying appellant’s motion to vacate an order for the issuance of a writ of assistance and to recall the writ. The transcript contains no bill of exceptions, nor are the papers contained in it authenticated as “the papers and evidence used or taken on the hearing of the motion” in any other way as required by rule XXIX, [144 Cal. lii, 119 Pac. xiv], of this court. “Unautlienticated papers in a transcript in which there is no bill of exceptions constitute no part of a record which can be considered on appeal.”

(Nash v. Harris, 57 Cal.

242; Herrlich v. McDonald, 80 Cal. 472, [22 Pac. 299] ;

Melde v. Reynolds, 120 Cal. 237, [52 Pac. 491];

Skinner v. Horn, 144 Cal. 278, [77 Pac. 904].) The result is that appellant presents no record upon which the order appealed from can be reviewed, and respondent’s motion to affirm the order must be and therefore is granted.

(Skinner v. Horn, 144 Cal. 278, [77 Pac. 904];

Skinner v. Horn, 146 Cal. 62, [79 Pac. 597];

Power v. Fairbanks, 146 Cal. 611, [80 Pac. 1075];

Wyckoff v. Pajaro R. C. Co., 146 Cal. 681, [81 Pac. 17].)

Melvin, J., and Lorigan, J., concurred.

Cites, in this corpus

Cited by