STITT v. STITT (1936)

Supreme Court of California.

STITT v. STITT.

L. A. 15376.

Decided: February 13, 1936

W. C. Dalzell, of Los Angeles, for appellant. Paul J. Otto and Paul E. Iverson, both of Los Angeles, for respondent.

Respondent has moved for a diminution of the record in order to bring before this court an order, made by the trial court subsequent to the filing of the transcript here, correcting certain typographical errors which occurred in the findings as originally signed.

It sufficiently appears that the correction was properly made by the lower court, and that it is necessary to a complete understanding of the record that the order making the corrections be now brought up and made a part of the record on appeal.

The motion for diminution is therefore granted.

PER CURIAM.

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Out of date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!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law