110 U.S. 217 - Aurrecoechea v. Bangs — 110 U.S. 217

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1988

2 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1IN ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA.

¶2Practice.

¶3When counsel stipulate to submit a case, fixing a time for filing of argument by the plaintiff, and a time subsequently for filing the defendant’s argument, and a time still later for plaintiff's reply, and the plaintiff failing to file an argument, the defendant files one within the time allowed to ■him and the plaintiff files no reply, the court will take the case as submitted under the rule.

¶4Stipulations between counsel for submitting suits, when filed, cannot be withdrawn without consent of both parties. Muller v. Bows, 94 U. S. 277, ap-provedand followed.

¶5 *218No appearance for plaintiff in error.

¶6Mr. A. Chester for defendant in error.

¶7Me. Chief Justice "Waite

¶8delivered tbe opinion of tbe court.

¶9Tbe counsel on both sides stipulated in writing'to submit tbis case under Rule 20. Tbe stipulation bears date November 15th, 1883. It was filed.bere on tbe 12tb of December. By its terms tbe counsel for tbe plaintiff in error was to bave until* the 12th of December to serve and file bis printed argument ; tbe counsel for tbe defendant in error until tbe 25th of December to servé and file bis printed argument; and tbe counsel for the plaintiff in error ten days to reply. No argument has been filed in behalf of tbe plaintiff in error, but one was filed in behalf of tbe defendant in error on tbe 15th of December. On tbe last day for submitting cases under tbe rule, which was after tbe expiration of tbe time tbe plaintiff in error was entitled to for bis reply, tbe defendant in error submitted tbe case under tbe stipulation.

¶10In Muller v. Dows, 94 U. S. 277 it was decided that stipulations of tbe kind between counsel might be- ¿nforced, and that they could not be withdrawn by either party without the consent of tbe other, except 'by leave of tbe court upon cause shown. We, therefore,- take tbe case as submitted under the rule, although there is no argument for tbe plaintiff in error, and without passing specially upon tbe sevéral assignments of error, which were returned with tbe transcript in accordance with tbe requirements of section 997 of tbe Revised Statutes,

¶11Affirm the judgment.