Com. Bank of Santa Ana v. Wells, 90 P. 981 (Cal. Ct. App. 1907). · Go Syfert
Search
Com. Bank of Santa Ana v. Wells, 90 P. 981 (Cal. Ct. App. 1907). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
30 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Jackson v. Denno (scotus, 1964-06-22)
Treatment trajectory · 1909 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1909 1967 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jackson v. Denno (2×)
SCOTUS · 1964 · confidence medium
MONTANA: State v. Rossell, 113 Mont. 457, 466 , 127 P. 2d 379, 383 (1942); State v. Dixson, 80 Mont. 181, 196 , 260 P. 138, 144 (1927); State v. Sherman, 35 Mont. 512, 518-519 , 90 P. 981, 982 (1907).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
COMMERCIAL BANK OF SANTA ANA, Respondent,
v.
T. A. WELLS and J. E. WELLS, Appellants
Civ. No. 382..
California Court of Appeal.
Apr 30, 1907.
90 P. 981
1907 Cal. App. LEXIS 297
J. Marion Brooks, for Appellants. E. E. Keech, for Respondent.
Allen.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
ALLEN, P. J.

Motion to dismiss appeals. The notice of appeal was from the judgment and from an order denying a new trial.. The only undertaking filed was conditioned to “pay all costs and damages which may he awarded on the appeal or on a dismissal thereof, not exceeding three hundred dollars.” It is not possible to determine which appeal is referred to in the undertaking. “It is so ambiguous that it must be regarded as if none had been filed.” (People v. Center, 61 Cal. 191; Home & Loan Associates v. Wilkins, 71 Cal. 626, [12 Pac. 799].) The fact that the time had elapsed within which one of the appeals should be taken is of no consequence. The notice referred to the judgment and order, both of which were appealable. A different rule applies when the notice relates to a nonappealable order. (Wadleigh v. Phelps, 147 Cal. 140, [81 Pac. 418].)

The application to file a new undertaking must be denied.

‘ ‘ To allow a new one to be filed would be, in effect, to permit a new appeal to be perfected after the time fixed by law.” (Home & Loan Associates v. Wilkins, 71 Cal. 626, [12 Pac. 799].)

Application to file undertaking is denied and the appeals-dismissed.

Shaw, J., and Taggart, J., concur.