Case Name: CHARLES E. LONG et al., Respondents, v. H. D. LESTER et al., Appellants
Court: District Court of Appeal of the State of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1931-03-16
Citations: 112 Cal. App. 595
Docket Number: Civ. No. 332
Parties: CHARLES E. LONG et al., Respondents, v. H. D. LESTER et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Appellate Reports
Volume: 112
Pages: 595–596

Head Matter:
[Civ. No. 332.
Fourth Appellate District.
March 16, 1931.]
CHARLES E. LONG et al., Respondents, v. H. D. LESTER et al., Appellants.
C. W. Braswell for Appellants.
Jas. R. McBride and Power, McFadzean & Crowe for Respondents.

Opinion:
MARKS, J.
In the court below respondents made a motion to strike out certain portions of an answer filed by appellants, which motion was granted. Appellants made a motion to vacate and set aside the foregoing order and another motion for an order giving them leave to file an amended answer. Both of the latter motions were denied. They have filed a notice of appeal in which they attempt to appeal from the foregoing orders. No judgment has been rendered in the court below.
Section 963 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides when an appeal may be taken. By the terms of this section no right of appeal is given from orders such as those of which appellants complain. These orders áre not appeal-able. (California Portland Cement Co. v. Boone, 181 Cal. 35 [183 Pac. 447] ; Cleland v. Walbridge, 78 Cal. 358 [20 Pac. 730] ; Tedford v. San Diego etc. Co., 79 Cal. App. 505 [249 Pac. 1093]; Cuddahy v. Gragg, 46 Cal. App. 578 [189 Pac. 721].) "An attempt to appeal from a nonappealable order does not give this court jurisdiction or authority to review it." (Sherman v. Standard Mines Co., 166 Cal. 524 [137 Pac. 249].)
It is ordered that the proceedings in this court be dismissed.
Barnard, P. J., and Jennings, J., concurred.