Case ID: cal-unrep_3/html/0707-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PATERSON, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JONES v. IVERSON.
    No. 15,077;
    December 14, 1892.
    31 Pac. 625.
    Appeal—Certificate of Undertaking.—The provision of Code of Civil Procedure, section 953, that the clerk or attorneys shall certify that an undertaking on appeal in due form has been filed, is not complied with by a general certificate that the record is correct.
    APPEAL from Superior Court, Mendocino County; R. McGarvey, Judge.
    Action by David Jones, administrator, against Niles Iverson. From a judgment entered, plaintiff appealed, and defendant moves to dismiss the appeal. Motion granted.
    Bert Schlesinger for appellant; J. A. Cooper for respondent.
   PATERSON, J.

The respondent has moved, on several grounds, to dismiss the appeal. There is in the record a copy of what purports to be an undertaking filed in the court below, but there is no certificate of the clerk that an undertaking in due form has been properly filed. We have held several times that it is not sufficient to insert in the tram-script a copy of an undertaking on appeal with a general certificate that the record is correct, but that it is necessary, in order to satisfy the express requirement of section 953, Code of Civil Procedure, to produce a certificate of the clerk or attorneys to the effect that an undertaking in due form has been properly filed in the court below: Swasey v. Adair, 83 Cal. 136, 23 Pac. 284.

The appeal is dismissed.

We concur: Garoutte, J.; Harrison, J.