Berniaud v. Beecher

18 P. 598, 76 Cal. 394, 1888 Cal. LEXIS 899
California Supreme Court·Decided June 5, 1888·No. No. 12378·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Thornton, J.

The court erred in allowing the following question to be put to one Daniel Meader, who was called as a witness for plaintiff: “ Do you know, by general reputation, who owned the west one half of block 229?” The question was answered by witness that it was by general reputation said to be the property of Mrs. Rosina Berniaud. Mrs. Berniaud is the person for whom this action is prosecuted by J. M. Hogan, her guardian [395]*395ad litem. We find no other error in the record. Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

McFarland, J., and Sharpstein, J., concurred.

Hearing in Bank denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Berniaud v. Beecher, 18 P. 598, 76 Cal. 394, 1888 Cal. LEXIS 899 (Cal. 1888).

18 P. 598 (Berniaud v. Beecher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jordan v. Worthen
68 Cal. App. 3d 310 (California Court of Appeal, 1977)
Simons v. Inyo Cerro Gordo Mining & Power Co.
292 P. 144 (California Court of Appeal, 1920)
State v. McGinnis
108 P. 132 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1910)
Terminal Co. v. Jacobs
109 Tenn. 727 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1902)