Cantlay v. Olds Stoller Inter-Exch.
Richard Cantlay, Copartners, Etc. v. Olds and Stoller Inter-Exchange, Etc.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- John W. Preston (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
[1] Motion to dismiss appeal. The issue turns upon whether or not on the nineteenth day of November, *Page 645 1928, respondents served upon appellant a notice in writing of entry of judgment (sec. 953d, Code Civ. Proc.). This issue is presented to us by affidavits and counter-affidavits of the respective attorneys, aided by the affidavit of a clerk in the office of one of the attorneys and also by certain notations upon the register of the clerk of the court. No benefit would result from a detailed recital of the claims of the parties. We feel that it is only necessary to say that the issue made rests upon a very sharp conflict of evidence and is between reputable attorneys. To our mind it is clouded with grave doubt. This being true, our duty requires a denial of the motion, and it is so ordered.
Waste, C.J., Curtis, J., Seawell, J., Richards, J., Shenk, J., and Langdon, J., concurred.