HOSKINS v. WALTERS (1935)

District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, California.

HOSKINS et al. v. WALTERS et al.

Civ. 1197.

Decided: May 28, 1935

Sanders & Jacques, of San Diego, for appellants. Walter F. Keen, of Los Angeles, for respondents.

Respondents, Alice Walters and Daniel E. Walters, have moved this court to dismiss the appeal herein for failure of appellants to file a transcript or bill of exceptions within the prescribed time. In support of the motion the certificate of the county clerk, as required by rule XI of the Rules for the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal, has been filed. There is no contradiction of the facts stated in the certificate. It appears therefrom that notice of appeal was filed on July 26, 1932, and an amended notice of appeal was filed on August 12, 1932; that no request for preparation of a transcript has been filed; that no transcript has been filed; that no bill of exceptions has been filed; that on March 22, 1935, all proceedings for the settlement of a proposed bill of exceptions theretofore filed in the trial court were terminated and dismissed by order of said court. The showing thus made is ample, and the motion must be granted.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

JENNINGS, Justice.

We concur: BARNARD, P. J.; MARKS, J.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network