[DOWNLOAD] "Tos v. Tos" by First Appellate District, Division Two District Court Of Appeal Of California ~ Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Tos v. Tos
- Author : First Appellate District, Division Two District Court Of Appeal Of California
- Release Date : January 25, 1951
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 52 KB
Description
Plaintiff and appellant brought this action against defendants and respondents for claimed wrongful arrest and imprisonment. On a former appeal from a judgment of dismissal after sustaining demurrers to the complaint without leave to amend, the judgment was reversed. (Kaufman v. Brown, 93 Cal. App. 2d 508 [209 P.2d 156].) The action went to trial, before a jury, upon a second amended complaint, the allegations of which are recited in the former opinion. A judgment of nonsuit resulted as to defendants George, Ulrick, Besnak and Stearns, and was denied as to the remaining defendants. After trial a verdict and judgment in their favor resulted. On December 29, 1950, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal from the judgment thus entered. On January 8, 1951, counsel for plaintiff gave notice to the clerk of such appeal and requested him to prepare record on appeal to include judgment roll, minutes, and reporters transcript. On January 18, 1951, plaintiff filed an amended notice requesting the clerk to prepare the record on appeal and to include the judgment roll, minutes and "limited reporters transcript" of the testimony of John W. Brown, taken under section 2055, Code of Civil Procedure, the testimony of Cyrus Stearns, and the courts instructions to the jury. After the clerk gave notice of the completion of the limited reporters and clerks transcripts, defendants, on February 26, 1951 filed objections thereto upon the ground that the reporters transcript was not a full and correct transcript of the oral proceedings provided for in rule 4 of part II, Rules on Appeal, and that plaintiff had not complied with rule 4, subdivision (b), and requested that plaintiff be required to present a complete transcript. On April 6, 1951, plaintiff filed a motion that he be permitted to amend his notice of appeal and to limit the grounds of appeal permitting him to use the incomplete reporters transcript previously requested and prepared. The motion and objections thereto were heard on April 6, 1951, and denied. Plaintiff, on April 19, 1951, secured an order from another judge allowing him to proceed in forma pauperis. The trial judge found by order duly