Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Welk v. Sorenson 179 Cal. 604

← Cases

Welk v. Sorenson

179 Cal. 604 Court Department Two. Decision date 1919-01-27 Docket L. A. No. 4721 English

Delivered by MELVIN, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 604
[L. A. No. 4721.
Department Two.
January 27,1919.]
THEODORE J. WELK, Appellant, v. ALBERT SORENSON et al, Respondents.

Headnote

Appeal—Alternative Method—Printing Eecord in Brief.—Where an appeal is taken by the alternative method and the appellant neither prints any of the record in the brief nor designates in any way the parts of the transcript upon which his alleged “statement of facts” is based, the brief will not be considered.
p. 605
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County refusing to credit costs upon a judgment. Grant Jackson, Judge. Affirmed.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Edward E. Kelley and Dian R. Gardner, for Appellant.
E. S. Janes, for Respondents.

This is an appeal from an order refusing to credit the sum of $15 costs (for which judgment had been entered in favor of Grace A. Sorenson) upon a judgment against her codefendant in the same action, Albert Sorenson, the appellant basing the argument against the order largely upon the case of Adams v. Baker, 24 Nev. 375 , [ 55 Pac. 362 ].

The appeal is by the alternative method, but appellant neither prints any of the record in the brief nor designates in any way the parts of the transcript upon which the alleged “statement of facts” is based. We will not, therefore, consider the brief. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 953c; Estate of Keith, 175 Cal. 26 , [ 165 Pac. 10 ]; Miller v. Oliver, 174 Cal. 404 , [ 163 Pac. 357 ].)

Order affirmed.

Wilbur, J., and Lennon, J., concurred.

Cases cited