Case Name: NEWMAN v. BANK OF CALIFORNIA and Another
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1887-08-30
Citations: 2 Cal. Unrep. 793
Docket Number: No. 12,088
Parties: NEWMAN v. BANK OF CALIFORNIA and Another.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Unreported Cases
Volume: 2
Pages: 793–794

Head Matter:
NEWMAN v. BANK OF CALIFORNIA and Another.
No. 12,088;
August 30, 1887.
15 Pac. 43.
Appeal—Time for Filing Transcript.—The filing of a transcript on appeal, within forty days after the bill of exceptions is settled, is a sufficient compliance with rule 2, supreme court of California, requiring the transcript to be filed within forty days after appeal taken.
Motion to dismiss appeal on the ground that the transcript was not served and filed within forty days after the appeal was taken. It appeared from the clerk’s certificate of proceedings in the lower court that the motion to set aside the judgment and grant a new trial was made and denied on February 11, 1887, and that the time to prepare a bill of exceptions was extended from time to time, and finally settled on April 22, 1887: The transcript was filed within forty days from that date. Rule 2 of the supreme court, upon which the motion was based, is as follows: ‘ ‘ The appellant in a civil ■action shall, within forty days after the appeal is perfected, and the bill of exceptions and the statement (if there be' any) are settled, serve and file the printed transcript of the record, duly certified to be correct by the attorneys of the respective parties, or by the clerk of the court from which the appeal is taken. ’ ’

Opinion:
By the COURT.
The motion to dismiss the appeal herein is denied. We do not see that the appellant is in any default for not having filed the transcript on appeal, the bill of exceptions not having been settled until the 22d of April, 1887: Rule 2 of this court. Motion denied.