THRASHER v. THRASHER (1939)

District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, California.

THRASHER v. THRASHER et al.

Civ. 2331

Decided: May 10, 1939

Max M. Gilford, of Los Angeles, for appellant. A. Heber Winder and William A. Wood, both of Riverside, and Winthrop O. Gordon, of Los Angeles, for respondents.

Motion by respondent to dismiss appeal on the ground that no transcript has been filed and that proceedings for the preparation of a record have been terminated in the trial court.

From the certificate of the county clerk it appears that judgment was entered on February 21, 1938; that a motion for a new trial was denied on April 25, 1938; that notice to the clerk to prepare a transcript was filed on May 31, 1938; that no further steps have been taken by the appellant since said date with respect to preparing a record; that on February 26, 1939, on motion, an order was made in the trial court terminating any proceedings for the preparation of a record; that no proceedings for the preparation of a bill of exceptions or of a transcript are now pending before said court; and that the time therefor has expired. The motion must, therefore, be granted. Bruce v. Tunstall, 24 Cal.App.2d 370, 75 P.2d 120; Christensen v. Couey, 136 Cal.App. 268, 28 P.2d 689.

The appeal is dismissed.

BARNARD, Presiding Justice.

We concur: MARKS, J.; GRIFFIN, 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Out of date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