Plecity v. Keilly

BARBARA PLECITY et al., Respondents, v. DAVID I. KEILLY, Appellant.

COUNSEL

Harrison Weil and Donald E. Ruppe for Appellant.

A. P. Michael Narlian for Respondents.

OPINION

McComb, J.

Respondents move to dismiss the appeal or affirm the judgment on the grounds that the appeal was taken for delay and that the questions on which a decision of the cause depends are so unsubstantial as not to need further argument.

[1] Prior to November 1, 1939, rule V, section 3 of the Rules for the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal (213 Cal. xliii) provided for the dismissal of an appeal or the affirmance of a judgment on the grounds of the present motion. However, September 29, 1939, the judicial council abrogated the section of rule V just mentioned, effective as of November 1, 1939. (Taylor v. Parsons, 39 Cal. App. 2d 336 [102 PaCal.2d 1096].)

Therefore, the present motion is not well taken and is denied.

Moore, P. J., and Wood, J., concurred.