Blackford v. Whistler

57 Cal. 136
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1880
DocketNo. 6,731
StatusPublished

This text of 57 Cal. 136 (Blackford v. Whistler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Blackford v. Whistler, 57 Cal. 136 (Cal. 1880).

Opinion

Thornton, J.:

In this action, which was for a partition, defendants answered, and also filed a cross-complaint.

The cause came on to be tried on the cross-complaint and the principal action, which were separately tried. Judgment was entered for the partition of the land asked for by plaintiff in his complaint. The cross-complaint was dismissed at the hearing for want of equity. Findings were filed as to the principal action and the cross-complaint. The defendants moved for a new trial, which was denied, and appeals are prosecuted by the defendants from the judgments of the Court for a partition and on the cross-complaint, and from the order denying the motion for a new trial.

The evidence sustains the findings, and there was no error in denying the motion for a new trial.

It is objected, that the Court did not find on all the issues. This position is untenable. As to the plea of the Statute of Limitations, the complaint and answer taken together show that there was no substantial issue raised by the plea, and the Court [137]*137did substantially find on it. (See 7th finding in the partition suit.)

We find no error in the record, and the judgment and order are affirmed.

Myrick, J., and Sharpstein, J., concurred.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 Cal. 136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blackford-v-whistler-cal-1880.