California Courts of Appeal, 1962

Curnutt v. Holk

California Courts of Appeal · Decided April 26, 1962 · Files

203 Cal. App. 2d 6; 21 Cal. Rptr. 224; 1962 Cal. App. LEXIS 2327

Cases that cite this one

14 later published cases cite this decision.

Bledsoe v. Informative Research (Cal. Ct. App. 1967)
Hayter Trucking, Inc. v. Shell Western E & P, Inc. (Cal. Ct. App. 1993)
Weiss v. Marcus (Cal. Ct. App. 1975)
Jackson v. Teachers Insurance (Cal. Ct. App. 1973)
Zappas v. King Williams Press, Inc. (Cal. Ct. App. 1970)
Amerson v. Christman (Cal. Ct. App. 1968)
People Ex Rel. Dep't of Pub. Works v. Clausen (Cal. Ct. App. 1967)
Oeth v. Mason (Cal. Ct. App. 1967)
Galanis v. Mercury Internat. Ins. Underwriters (Cal. Ct. App. 1967)
Vibert v. Berger (Cal. 1966)
Continental Cas. Co. v. Rizzio Truck Co. (Cal. Ct. App. 1963)
Continental Casualty Co. v. Rizzio Truck Co. (Cal. Ct. App. 1963)
Marc D. Leh v. General Petroleum Corporation (9th Cir. 1964)
Leh v. General Petroleum Corp. (9th Cir. 1964)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

FILES, J.

Plaintiff has attempted to appeal from an order sustaining a demurrer to the complaint without leave to amend. That order is not appealable. (Cole v. Rush, 40 Cal.2d 178 [252 P.2d 1].) A notice of appeal from such a nonappealable order may be liberally construed as an appeal from the judgment if there is a judgment. (Evola v. Wendt Construction Co., 158 Cal.App.2d 658 [323 P.2d 158]; Smith v. Smith, 126 Cal.App.2d 194 [272 P.2d 118] ; Crane v. Livingston, 98 Cal.App.2d 699 [220 P.2d 744].) The record here contains a document signed by the trial judge entitled “Order Sustaining Demurrer” which orders that “the above action be and the same is hereby dismissed.” This document would constitute a judgment if entered in the judgment book, but the record shows no such entry. “In no case is a judgment effectual for any purpose until entered.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 664.) Prior to entry there is no assurance that the trial judge may not reconsider his decision. (Phillips v. Phillips, 41 Cal.2d 869, 874 [264 P.2d 926]; Adoption of Bird, 183 Cal.App.2d 140, 144 [6 Cal.Rptr. 675].)

The appeal is dismissed.

Shinn, P. J., and Ford, J., concurred.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.