Campodonico v. Oregon Improvement Co. (1890) · DecisionDepot

Campodonico v. Oregon Improvement Co.

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Aug 2, 1890 No. No. 13606Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a failure to timely file points does not warrant an automatic affirmance of the judgment, as the court's rules do not prescribe such a penalty.

Issues

Whether a failure to timely file points justifies an automatic affirmance of the judgment without consideration of the merits.

Disposition. Motion denied.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the rule prescribes no such penalty, and is not understood to involve any, except that the court may, in its discretion, refuse the appellant the privilege of making an oral argument.”

Synopsis

Motion to affirm a judgment of the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

The Court. The transcript in this cause was filed December 5, 1889, and the cause was placed on the Los Angeles calendar for April 14, 1890.

The appellant’s points were not filed until April 8th, twenty-six days after the time when, according to the rule of the court, they should have been filed. On the day the cause was set for hearing the respondent moved the court to affirm the judgment without considering the merits of the appeal, as a penalty upon the appellant for his failure to comply with the rule.

But the rule prescribes no such penalty, and is not understood to involve any, except that the court may, in its discretion, refuse the appellant the privilege of making an oral argument.

Motion denied.

Campodonico v. Oregon Improvement Co.

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief