Freeman v. Brown
Before: Smith
Synopsis
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County denying a motion for leave to amend a statement on motion for a new trial. Walter Bordwell, Judge.
Motion to dismiss appeal.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Opinion
The COURT.
This is an appeal from an order denying the defendant’s motion to amend his statement on motion for a new trial by inserting specifications therein. The plaintiff moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the order is not appealable.
Appellant by his motion and application sought relief under section 473, Code of Civil Procedure. The order denying such relief is appealable.
(Murphy
v.
Stelling,
138 Cal. 642, [72 Pac. 176];
Kaltschmidt
v.
Weber,
136 Cal. 675, [69 Pac. 497].)
Motion to dismiss is denied.
Concurrence — Smith
SMITH, J., Concurring.
I concur in the order denying the motion to dismiss the appeal in this ease, and also in the opinion that the decision in
Murphy
v.
Stelling,
138 Cal. 642, [72 Pac. 176], is directly in point. But I regard that case as merely an application of the more general principle that
[109]
all orders made in proceedings for a new trial which have the effect of finally disposing of the motion are special orders made after final judgment, and therefore appealable. (Hayne on New Trial, sec. 146;
Calderwood
v.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)