Gabel v. Page

California Court of Appeal Dec 3, 1906 No. Civ. No. 324.Published

Before: SMITH, J. —

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court denied a motion to dismiss an appeal because the transcript was filed within the court-authorized extension period, and the court maintains a policy of liberality regarding such extensions when no hearing delay results.

Issues

Whether an appeal should be dismissed when the transcript was filed within an court-ordered extension period.

Disposition. Motion denied.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The transcript was filed within the time allowed by the order of the court extending the time; and this order cannot be attacked on a motion to dismiss”

“It has always been the practice of this court to be liberal in extending the time for filing transcripts or briefs in cases where no delay in the hearing of the case can result.”

Motion to dismiss appeal. The transcript was filed within the time allowed by the order of the court extending the time; and this order cannot be attacked on a motion to dismiss; nor, were it otherwise, have we any reason to be dissatisfied with it. It has always been the practice of this court to be liberal in extending the time for filing transcripts or briefs in cases where no delay in the hearing of the case can result.

The motion is denied.

Allen, J., and Gray, P. J., concurred. *Page 510

Gabel v. Page

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief