Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

139 Cal. 14

72 P 357

Dougherty v. McKagney

California Supreme Court

Decided April 1, 1903

California Supreme Court · decided 1903-04-01

MOTION to strike out a bill of exceptions upon an appeal from a judgment and order of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County affirming the probate of a will and denying a petition for revocation thereof. M. H. Hyland, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently August 1929

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1903-04-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

BEATTY, C. J.

¶1 I concur. This is a motion by respondent to strike from the record a bill of exceptions .printed in fhe transcript. The motion is. not based upon the record itself, but upon affidavits .filed here originally, tending to prove that the appellant did not propose his bill of .exceptions within the time prescribed.by the code.

¶2 , When a bill of exceptions or statement has been settled and allowed by the trial court, the question whether the appellant has proceeded regularly in obtaining a settlement cannot be tried in an original proceeding in this court, upon evidence aliunde the record. It can only be raised upon the record itself, and. must be decided upon the exceptions reserved by the respondent at the.time of the settlement, and incorporated in a bill of exceptions.

¶3 If any valid-objection to the consideration of the bill attacked by this motion appears in the record, it will be given its due consideration and effect by the Department to which the cause has been assigned.

¶4 The motion should be dismissed.

/139/cal/14 · .json · Public domain