Case Name: J. L. TRUITNER et al., Respondents, v. CHARLES M. KNIGHT et al., Defendants; CLIFFORD TRUITNER, Appellant
Court: District Court of Appeal of the State of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1926-06-23
Citations: 78 Cal. App. 801
Docket Number: Civ. No. 5665
Parties: J. L. TRUITNER et al., Respondents, v. CHARLES M. KNIGHT et al., Defendants; CLIFFORD TRUITNER, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Appellate Reports
Volume: 78
Pages: 801–801

Head Matter:
[Civ. No. 5665.
First Appellate District, Division One.
June 23, 1926.]
J. L. TRUITNER et al., Respondents, v. CHARLES M. KNIGHT et al., Defendants; CLIFFORD TRUITNER, Appellant.
Ford, Johnson & Bourquin and Carling & Cummings for Appellant.
G. Levin Aynesworth for Respondent.

Opinion:
TYLER, P. J.
Motion to dismiss appeal. Plaintiff recovered a judgment against defendant in the sum of four thousand dollars. The action was one for damages for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident. Defendant appealed. It is claimed that the appeal was not taken within the time allowed by law. There is no merit in the contention. The precise questions here presented were passed upon in the case of Truitner v. Knight et al., ante, p. 508 [248 Pac. 702],
Upon the authority of that ease the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.
Cashin, J., and Knight, J., concurred.
A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on August 19, 1926.