Ashton v. Heydenfeldt
California Supreme Court Apr 10, 1899 No. S. F. No. 1266Published
Synopsis
Appeal—Amendment of Judgment.—The Supreme Court will not amend its judgment directing a demurrer to the complaint to be overruled, by adding thereto a direction that respondents be allowed to answer, as application for leave to answer can be made to the trial court.
PER CURIAM. Respondents move to amend the judgment rendered, which directs that the demurrer to the complaint be overruled, by adding thereto a direction that respondents be allowed to answer; but this direction is not necessary, because the court below, if a proper showing be made, will undoubtedly allow the respondents to answer.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)