Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

45 Cal. 63

Mann v. Haley

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1872

California Supreme Court · decided 1872-07-01

<p>Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, County of Alameda.</p> <p>This was an action for the restitution and possession of certain lands on the Encinal of San Antonio. The plaintiffs had judgment for the possession of the entire premises described in the complaint. Afterwards the Court modified the judgment so as to make it apply to a smaller tract. The defendants appeal from the modified judgment.</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1872-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently December 1934

7 state decisions

401872188018901900191019201930decided

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.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court:

¶1A judgment was originally rendered in the action on the 11th day of October, 1870. As the result of a motion for a new trial, a modification of this judgment was directed by the'Court below on March 30th, 1871. . On March 5th, 1872, an appeal was taken “from the judgment entered * ■* ■* on the 30th day of March, A. D. 1871.” Objection is now made by the respondent that the appeal, having been taken more than one year after the 11th day of October, 1870, is too late, and must be dismissed on that ground. The modification of a judgment, made as the result of a motion for a new trial, is- in effect the rendition of a new judgment, and a party desiring to have it reviewed may appeal at any time within one year after its rendition.

¶2Motion to dismiss the appeal denied, and cause continued, with leave to the respondent to suggest a diminution of the record, if he be so advised.

/45/cal/63 · .json · Public domain