TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Sumner v. Edmunds

EDGAR W. SUMNER, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. WILLIAM J. EDMUNDS Et Al., Appellants; M. A. BUCHER, Cross-Complainant and Respondent

Sumner v. Edmunds, 13 P.2d 1046 (Cal. Ct. App. 1932)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Court of Appeal · State Appellate Courts
Decided
August 24, 1932
Docket
No. 785.
Judges
Morton
Citations
13 P.2d 1046125 Cal. App. 4871932 Cal. App. LEXIS 693

Opinion of the Court — Morton

MORTON, J., pro tem.

In this action plaintiff recovered judgment for two thousand six hundred dollars ($2,600) against defendants William J. Edmunds and Fresno Republican Publishing Company, a corporation, for injuries received by him in an automobile collision, upon the finding of the trial court that he was a guest of said defendants at the time of the accident. Defendant M. A. Bucher, owner of the truck with which the Edmunds automobile collided, filed a cross-complaint against defendants Edmunds and Fresno Republican Publishing Company, a corporation, upon which the trial court awarded him judgment in the sum of one thousand two hundred thirty-one dollars ($1,231). These defendants appealed from both judgments. Plaintiff Sumner has not filed a reply brief nor asked an extension of time within which so to do. Respondent Bucher moves the court for an order dismissing the appeal as to the judgment rendered in his favor against the cross-defendants and appellants upon his cross-complaint.

After an examination of appellants’ brief, we are unable to find a substantial ground of appeal from the judgment awarded respondent Bucher. Appellants accept the finding of the trial court that Edmunds was an employee of the Fresno Republican Publishing Company and attack the Sumner judgment upon this premise. The questions raised therein all pertain to the issues involved in the Sumner judgment and if sustained would not affect the Bucher judgment.

*489 The motion is therefore granted dismissing the appeal of the cross-defendants and appellants from the judgment rendered against them upon the cross-complaint of the said M. A. Bucher.

Marks, Acting P. J., and Jennings, J., concurred.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1932: 119322026peak 1932 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. City of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles-Inyo Farms Co.14 P.2d 339 (Cal. Ct. App. 1932)

Most recent

  1. City of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles-Inyo Farms Co.14 P.2d 339 (Cal. Ct. App. 1932)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list