gno.law

Madsen v. Turlock Irrigation District

California Court of Appeal · Civ. No. 6642 · 1943-01-21 · Published · 56 Cal. App. 2d 742 · 133 P.2d 416 · 1943 Cal. App. LEXIS 241

I. B. MADSEN v. TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT

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

THE COURT.

The plaintiff has attempted to appeal from an order sustaining defendant’s demurrer to the complaint without leave to amend the pleading. There is no appeal from that order. It does not appear that a judgment was entered pursuant to that order. The record contains no reference to a judgment.

The purported appeal in this ease was prematurely and erroneously taken from the order sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend. The right of appeal is statutory. No right of appeal exists unless it is found either in the Constitution or in enacted statutes. (2 Cal. Jur. Ill, § 4.) It has been uniformly held a reviewing court is without jurisdiction to entertain a purported appeal from an order sustaining or overruling a demurrer to the complaint, even though it is made without leave to amend the pleading. (Rickert v. Zoeger, 169 Cal. 399 [146 P. 894]; Ham v. Los Angeles County, 46 Cal.App. 148, 151 [189 P. 462]; Braren v. Reliable Carpet Works, Inc., 125 Cal.App. 489 [13 P.2d 972]; Doran v. Sherman, 18 Cal.App.2d 479 [64 P.2d 442]; 2 Cal. Jur. 156, § 26.) In the Rickert case, supra, which was based on a record which is exactly like the one which is involved in this case, it is said :

“An order sustaining or overruling a demurrer is not an appealable order. [Citing many cases.] This court is therefore without jurisdiction to act upon the so-called appeal and it must be dismissed.”

The purported appeal is therefore dismissed.

Cites, in this corpus

Cited by