Court Opinion

ID: 9553748
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 19:34:22.59107+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:32:11.114164
License: Public Domain

SHINN, P. J.
I concur. Section 583 declares a salutary rule. It is designed to prevent unseemly conflicts between counsel with respect to claimed oral stipulations and it creates a mandatory duty on the part of the court. But if it were an open question I would say that when a defendant’s attorney appears in court upon a plaintiff’s motion for a continuance, hears the motion made and granted, waives notice of the order of continuance and otherwise remains mum, his conduct, which has been relied upon to the prejudice of his adversary, should estop him and his client from urging a dismissal under section 583.
Appellant’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied August 26,1959. McComb, J., did not participate therein.