Case ID: cal_68/html/0235-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Ross, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[No. 11182.
    Department One.
    December 23, 1885.]
    J. A. C. POUPION, Respondent, v. JOHN MUZIO et al., Appellants.
    Appeal — Dismissal—Filing Transcript — Stipulation Extending Time por.— An appeal will not be dismissed because of the failure of the appellant to file the transcript within the time prescribed by the rule of the Supreme Court, if the respondent by a written stipulation extended the time for filing it to a date beyond the hearing of the motion to dismiss, although the stipulation was not filed with the clerk.
    Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco.
    Motion to dismiss appeal. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
    
      A. J. Le Breton, for Appellants.
    
      Gustave Touchard, for Respondent.
   Ross, J.

— The respondent moved to dismiss the appeal herein because of the failure of appellant to file the transcript within the time prescribed by a rule of this court. Appellant in answer to the motion offered to file the printed transcript, and at the same time presented a written stipulation signed by the attorney of record of respondent extending the time to file the transcript to a date' beyond the hearing of the motion. It is objected that the stipulation is of no effect because not filed Avith the clerk. But we think that in a matter relating only to the time in which the record on appeal shall be filed here the objection is not well taken, and that the appeal should not be dismissed.

Motion denied.

McKee, J., and McKinstry, J., concurred.