Woodbury v. Nevada Southern Railway Co.

Citations

• 115 Cal. 85

Syllabus

<p>Appeal—Dismissal—Authority of Attorney for Corporation Appellant—Substitution—Conflicting Affidavit.—Where an appeal is taken by a corporation from a large judgment against ifc, it will not be dismissed on the ground that the attorney who took it acted without authority, nor will a motion be granted to substitute another attorney for the appellant for the purpose of consenting to a dismissal of the appeal, where the showing made by the moving parties is not strong and clear, but there are conflicting affidavits, and the evidence considered as a whole does not affirmatively establish the alleged facts upon which the motions are based, or show who among contesting stockholders have the control of the corporation appellant.</p> <p>Id. — Substitution of Attorneys Pending Appeal — Application to Superior Court.—It seems that the application for substitution of attorneys of record, pending an appeal, should be made to the superior court; but the question is not passed upon by a majority of the justices of the court.</p>