History
  • No items yet
midpage
Frankel v. Deidesheimer
93 Cal. 73
Cal.
1892
Check Treatment
The Court.

— This cause has been long pending in this court, and has been reargued twice. One of the justices is disqualified from participating in its decision, and of the six other justices three are of opinion that the judgment should be affirmed, and three are of opinion that the judgment should be reversed. Repeated consultations have ended in the same disagreement, and there is no probability of any change in the opinions of those now constituting the court, or of any immediate change in the personnel of the court. Under these circumstances we think that the judgment should be affirmed, for the reasons stated in Luco v. De Toro, 88 Cal. 26.

The judgment and order are affirmed.

Mr. Justice Harrison, being disqualified, did not participate in the foregoing.

Case Details

Case Name: Frankel v. Deidesheimer
Court Name: California Supreme Court
Date Published: Jan 22, 1892
Citation: 93 Cal. 73
Docket Number: No. 13412
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.