Hersh v. Garau

CONREY, P. J.

The grounds of motion to dismiss are that in the notice of appeal there was no statement naming the court to which the appeal was taken, and that the notice of appeal is fatally defective because not signed by an attorney of record of the appealing parties. Specific designation of the court to which the appeal was taken was not necessary to vest in the proper court jurisdiction of the appeal.

(Rabe

v.

Lloyd,

187 Cal. 282 [201 Pac. 598].)

The notice of appeal was signed by the attorneys as follows: “Walter F. Haas, W. E. McClintock, by W. E. McClintock.” It is contended by respondents that McClintock was not an attorney of record and therefore was without authority to give a notice of appeal in the action. In the clerk’s transcript it appears that the answer of defendants Garau to the complaint in intervention was signed by Haas & Dunnigan, W. E. McClintock, by W. E. McClintock. It is true that the name of McClintock was not signed to the answer of the same defendants to the previously filed answer of the defendants to the plaintiffs’ complaint. It further appears by recitals in the findings of fact and in the judgment of the court that the said defendants Garau were represented at the trial by the law firm of Haas & Dunnigan by Walter F. Haas, and W. E. Mc-Clintock. We think that this record is sufficient to establish the right of Mr. McClintock to act in the matter of giving notice of appeal from the judgment.

The motion to affirm the judgment is based upon the ground that the opening brief of appellants does not comply with the provisions of section 953e of the Code of Civil Procedure and does not comply with the requirements of rule VIII of this court in this: That included in sundry specified pages of the brief are numerous pages of excerpts of testimony where no reference is given to the line or page

[200]

of the typewritten transcript. In the said brief there are a considerable number of instances wherein statements of testimony are given or quotations of testimony are given without specifying the page of the transcript where this testimony would be found. In some other instances the proper citation is made. The brief was in this respect carelessly prepared and was not as free from objections presented against it as was the brief considered by us in