DocketNumber: Docket No. S.F. 14889.
Citation Numbers: 26 P.2d 6, 219 Cal. 290, 1933 Cal. LEXIS 389
Judges: Preston
Filed Date: 10/27/1933
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/2/2024
This is an appeal from so much of an order taxing costs on appeal as allows to defendant an item of $116 incurred by her as costs on trial of the action in the court below.
The trial on its merits resulted in judgment for plaintiffs, which was reversed on appeal (Monson v. Fischer,
[1] This item could properly be allowed only after a final judgment for defendant in the trial court (sec. 1024, Code Civ. Proc.); it was no part of her costs on appeal. The reversal of the judgment sets the case completely at large except as restricted by the opinion of the appellate court (Central Sav.Bank v. Lake,
The order taxing costs of appeal in this action is therefore modified by striking therefrom said item of $116 and, as so modified, the order is affirmed, appellants to recover their costs on this appeal.
Langdon, J., Curtis, J., Thompson, J., Seawell, J., and Waste, C.J., concurred.
Central Savings Bank of Oakland v. Lake , 201 Cal. 438 ( 1927 )
Markart v. Zeimer , 74 Cal. App. 152 ( 1925 )
Monson v. Fischer , 118 Cal. App. 503 ( 1931 )
Friends of Mammoth v. Town of Mammoth Lakes Redevelopment ... , 82 Cal. App. 4th 511 ( 2000 )
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway v. Superior Court , 12 Cal. 2d 549 ( 1939 )
City of Los Angeles v. City of San Fernando , 14 Cal. 3d 199 ( 1975 )
Rinaldo v. Superior Court , 15 Cal. App. 2d 585 ( 1936 )
Weightman v. Hadley , 138 Cal. App. 2d 831 ( 1956 )
Kellogg v. Honcutt Gold M. Co., Ltd. , 25 Cal. App. 2d 109 ( 1938 )
Erlin v. National Union Fire Insurance , 7 Cal. 2d 547 ( 1936 )
Clayton v. Schultz , 18 Cal. 2d 328 ( 1941 )