Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

statutetrialmotioncivil procedurerespondent
statutetrialmotioncivil procedurerespondent

Related Cases

League of Oregon Cities v. State, 334 Or. 645, 56 P.3d 892
View Case »
Morgan v. Wiser, 711 S.W.2d 220, 61 A.L.R.4th 1173
View Case »
State v. Shack, 58 N.J. 297, 277 A.2d 369, 77 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2408, 65 Lab.Cas. P 52,562
View Case »
Haehlen v. Wilson, 11 Cal.App.2d 437, 54 P.2d 62
View Case »
Rideout v. Knox, 148 Mass. 368, 19 N.E. 390, 2 L.R.A. 81, 12 Am.St.Rep. 560
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Hadacheck v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 193 Cal. 183, 223 P. 71

Facts

Amos F. Hadacheck filed a petition for a writ of mandate to compel the Superior Court of Los Angeles County to settle a transcript. The respondent's failure to certify the transcript was based on the argument that the notice to prepare the record was given after the judgment and before the trial court's decision on a motion for a new trial. The relevant statute requires that the notice must be filed within ten days after the entry of judgment or within ten days after the decision on a motion for a new trial.

The failure of respondent to certify the transcript in this case is based upon the proposition that the notice to prepare a record under the provisions of section 953a of the Code of Civil Procedure was given after judgment and before the decision of the trial court upon the motion for a new trial.

Issue

Did the notice to prepare the record comply with the statutory requirements under section 953a of the Code of Civil Procedure?

Did the notice to prepare the record comply with the statutory requirements under section 953a of the Code of Civil Procedure?

Rule

The statute provides that the notice must be filed within ten days after notice of entry of the judgment or, if a motion for a new trial is pending, within ten days after notice of decision denying said motion.

The statute in that regard provides that—— The ‘said notice must be filed within ten days after notice of entry of the judgment, order or decree, or if a proceeding on motion for a new trial be pending, within ten days after notice of decision denying said motion, or of other termination thereof.’

Analysis

The court interpreted the statute to allow the filing of the notice at any time after the entry of judgment and before the expiration of ten days after the notice of decision on the motion for a new trial. Since the notice was given during this permissible period, the court found it sufficient and concluded that the respondent should have certified the transcript.

We think the proper interpretation of the section permits the filing of the notice at any time after notice of the entry of the judgment, and before the expiration of ten days ‘after notice of decision’ on motion for a new trial.

Conclusion

The court granted the writ of mandate, ordering the respondent to certify the transcript as required by law.

Let a peremptory writ issue.

Who won?

Amos F. Hadacheck prevailed in the case because the court found that the notice to prepare the record was timely filed according to the statutory requirements.

You must be