Bernal v. Wade
BERNAL v. WADE
- Area
- civil
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
By the Court:
The time to file the petition for a rehearing expired on November eighth. The petition was placed in the express office at San José for transmission to the Clerk of this Court, and should have reached him in time to be filed, but it was not, in fact, received until the tenth of November, when the remittitur had been sent to the Court below. The case is not distinguishable from that of Hanson v. McCue, 43 Cal. 178, and the remittitur must, therefore, be recalled and the petition for a rehearing placed on file.
So ordered.
Cites, in this corpus
- Hanson v. McCue No. 2,578 · 1872-01-15
Cited by
- Estate of Hanley v. Hanley L. A. 18316 · 1943-10-29
- Isenberg v. Sherman Docket No. S.F. 12560. · 1932-01-29
- Trumpler v. Trumpler Sac. No. 398 · 1899-01-07