Smith v. Rothschild

California Court of Appeal · Civ. No. 9427 · 1934-07-19 · Published · 140 Cal. App. 4 · 34 P.2d 1050 · 1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 491

LOUIS E. SMITH v. CORA ROTHSCHILD

Area: civil
Panel: John T. Nourse (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 — Nourse

NOURSE, P. J.

The plaintiffs have moved to dismiss or affirm under the rule upon the grounds that the appeal is frivolous and presents grounds so unsubstantial as not to require further argument. The motion was accompanied by a typewritten brief fully arguing the merits of the appeal. When this motion is made for the purpose of advancing the hearing of an appeal on the merits, or to avoid preparation of a brief under the rules, it should be denied. The motion in this ease is of that character.

Motion denied.

Sturtevant, J., and Spence, J., concurred.

Cited by

Lowe v. City of San Diego Civ. No. 1159 · 1934-10-15