History
  • No items yet
midpage
Guardianship of Degnan
132 Cal. 260
| Cal. | 1901
|
Check Treatment

This is a motion to dismiss the appeal of Bridget Degnan, based upon her own affidavit and the supporting affidavits of others, and pressed before the court by respondent's attorneys. It may be conceded that the regular, orderly, and courteous method of procedure would have been for the client to give notice to her own attorney of her desire that her appeal should be dismissed, and in the event of his refusal, after notice, to procure a substitution of attorneys, and through the new attorney bring the matter to the attention of the court. But the fact that the mode here adopted is unusual does not deprive the appellant of her right to a dismissal, when it is made to appear to the court, as in *Page 261 this case it is, that such is her desire; it not being contended that her attorney has any special contract or lien upon any property in controversy entitling him to continue the prosecution. By way of intimation, rather than accusation, it has been suggested that there has been some impropriety or unprofessional conduct upon the part of some one of the attorneys connected with this matter. If this be so, its consideration has no place in this determination, and the matter can receive attention only after the preferment of charges properly formulated.

The appeal is therefore dismissed.

Case Details

Case Name: Guardianship of Degnan
Court Name: California Supreme Court
Date Published: Mar 19, 1901
Citation: 132 Cal. 260
Docket Number: S.F. No. 2678.
Court Abbreviation: Cal.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.