Case ID: cal-app_45/html/0582-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "JAMES, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[Civ. No. 2503.
    Second Appellate District, Division One.
    January 28, 1920.]
    CHARLES F. ZIEGLER, Appellant, v. A. COLKINS et al., Respondents.
    EH Appeal—Failure to File Brief or Appear for Oral Argument —Affirmance of Judgment.—Where an appeal is taken under the alternative method but the appellant does not file a brief or appear at the time set for oral argument, no reason being presented to the appellate court to show that the judgment as entered by the trial court was in anywise defective, erroneous, or improper, the judgment will be affirmed.
    
      APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a motion to vacate and set aside the same. Fred H. Taft, Judge. Appeal from order dismissed; judgment affirmed.
    The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
    Charles H. Mattingly for Appellant.
    James Brunken for Respondents.
   JAMES, J.

[1] From an examination of the clerk’s transcript, prepared in accordance with the alternative method of appeal, we learn that the plaintiff in this action gave notice of appeal from an adverse judgment and from an order made after judgment denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate and set aside the same. The latter motion appears to have been, in effect, a motion for a new trial, and, so considered, the order denying the same is not appealable. The clerk’s transcript and reporter’s transcript were filed in this court on November 7, 1917, and thereafter stipulations were made between the parties extending time to appellant to file his brief to August 15, 1918. Appellant filed no brief and did not appear at the time set for oral argument. No reason is presented to us, therefore, to show that the judgment as entered by the trial court was in anywise defective, erroneous, or improper.

The appeal from the order is dismissed; the judgment is affirmed.

Conrey, P. J., and Shaw, J., concurred.