Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

WHIPLEY v. MILLS

         JUDGES: Burnett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Field, J., concurring.

         OPINION

          BURNETT, Judge

         The judgment in this case was rendered on the 29th of March, 1852. Notice of appeal filed in the Clerk's office April 15th, 1852, and transcript on appeal filed in this Court June 17th, 1857. The record contains no evidence that a copy of the notice was served upon the appellee, as required by the 337th section of the Code.

         The appeal is made by filing and serving the notice. Both requisites must exist to complete the appeal. If either could be omitted, it would be the filing of the notice. A failure to notify the other party is more material than a failure to file in the Clerk's office. No copy of the notice having been served upon the appellee, he had no opportunity to move to dismiss the appeal. The result was that the transcript is made out and sent up more than five years after filing the notice of appeal. (Franklin v. Reiner , 8 Cal. 340.)

         The appeal must be dismissed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Whipley v. Mills
(Apr 1, 1858)