From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mix v. San Diego & C. R. Co.

Supreme Court of California
Oct 27, 1890
86 Cal. 235 (Cal. 1890)

Opinion

         Department One

         Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, and from an order denying a new trial.

         COUNSEL:

         Cassius Carter, S.C. McCormick, and Leovy & Humes, for Appellant.

          Hunsaker, Britt & Goodrich, for Respondents.


         JUDGES: Works, J. Fox, J., and Paterson, J., concurred.

         OPINION

          WORKS, Judge

         This is an appeal from a judgment of nonsuit. A statement of the case is copied into the transcript, but it does not appear to have been filed in the court below after it was settled. This being so, it is no part of the record, and cannot be looked to in aid of this appeal; and as the only ruling complained of depends upon the evidence given at the trial, the position taken by the appellant has nothing to support it. (Mills v. Dearborn , 82 Cal. 51, 55.) Besides, it does not appear that the statement was used on motion for a new trial, and for that reason it cannot be the basis of an appeal from the judgment. (Jue Fook Sam v. Lord , 83 Cal. 160.)

         Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Mix v. San Diego & C. R. Co.

Supreme Court of California
Oct 27, 1890
86 Cal. 235 (Cal. 1890)
Case details for

Mix v. San Diego & C. R. Co.

Case Details

Full title:L. O. MIX, Appellant, v. SAN DIEGO AND CUYAMACA RAILROAD COMPANY et al.…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Oct 27, 1890

Citations

86 Cal. 235 (Cal. 1890)
24 P. 1027

Citing Cases

Wells v. Kreyenhagen

In Mills v. Dearborn , 82 Cal. 51, it was held that, "until a settled statement on motion for new trial is…

Richardson v. City of Eureka

The statement cannot be considered, as it does not appear by the indorsement of the judge thereon that the…