Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Baldie v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n 97 Cal. App. 2d 614

← Cases

Baldie v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n

97 Cal. App. 2d 614 Court First Dist., Div. Two. Decision date 1950-05-18 Docket Civ. No. 14350 English

Contents

Majority

p. 614
[Civ. No. 14350.
First Dist., Div. Two.
May 18, 1950.]
MARY IRENE BALDIE, Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL TRUST AND SAVINGS ASSOCIATION (a Corporation) et al., Respondents.
(See former opinion in this case, 97 Cal.App.2d 70 , 217 P.2d 111 .)
Jonathan H. Rowell for Appellant.
Frank V. Kington for Respondents.

Counsel have asked us to clarify the apportionment of costs on the two appeals. Under the Rules on Appeal (rule 26(a)) the prevailing party is entitled to his costs. These appeals were presented on one clerk’s and one reporter’s transcript and one set of briefs. However the pleadings, evidence and arguments are separate. Respondent Pacheco is entitled to costs against appellant on his appeal and appellant is entitled to costs on the Bullock appeal. The costs should be apportioned on the basis of the portions of the transcripts and briefs devoted to each case.

Cases cited