# Weisman v. Board of Building & Safety Commissioners

> California Court of Appeal · September 19, 1927 · 85 Cal. App. 493

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3286824

## Case

- **Full name:** ISADORE WEISMAN Et Al., Respondents, v. BOARD OF BUILDING AND SAFETY COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES Et Al., Appellants
- **Court:** California Court of Appeal
- **Decided:** September 19, 1927
- **Citations:** 85 Cal. App. 493; 259 P. 768; 1927 Cal. App. LEXIS 492
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Collier
- **Judges:** Collier, Craig
- **Cited by:** 6 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3286824

## Opinion text

COLLIER, J.,
pro tem.
I concur in the judgment of affirmance. “It has been held by this court that there is a material difference between the
rendition
and the
entry
of a judgment. A judgment is rendered when it is announced by the court. It is entered when it is actually entered in the judgment book.”
(Schurtz
v.
Romer,
81 Cal. 244, 247 [ 22 Pac. 657 ].)
“The enforcement of a judgment does not depend upon its entry or docketing. These are merely ministerial acts. ...”
(Los Angeles County Bank
v.
Raynor,
61 Cal. 145, 147 . See, also,
Otto
v.
Long,
144 Cal. 144, 146 [ 77 Pac. 885 ];
Janes
v.
Ballard,
107 Cal. 130, 132 [ 40 Pac. 108 ].)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3286824. Public record. Not legal advice.