History
  • No items yet
midpage
Holverstot v. Bugby
13 Cal. 43
Cal.
1859
Check Treatment
Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, J. concurring.

We are not satisfied, from the examination of this record, that there is any substantial error to the prejudice of the Appellant. But we cannot consider the errors assigned, except that as to the admission of the declaration of plaintiff as sole trader, which is not well taken.

1. Mo grounds or reasons were given for the nonsuit asked.

2. Mo grounds were given for the motion for the new trial.

3. Mo exceptions were taken to the instructions of the Court.

We cannot, then, look into the evidence to see if the verdict is sanctioned by the proof, or the instructions by the law. The affidavits for new trial, for newly discovered evidence, are insufficient if we could consider them.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Holverstot v. Bugby
Court Name: California Supreme Court
Date Published: Jul 1, 1859
Citation: 13 Cal. 43
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.