Brotherton v. Hart

11 Cal. 405
California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1858·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Terry, C. J., at the July Term, 1858, delivered the opinion of the Court—

Field, J., concurring.

In this case the parties, by stipulation, consented that the motion for a new trial should be denied. Having consented to the order, they cannot now question its correctness. (Meerholtz v. Sessions, 9 Cal. 277.)

Judgment affirmed.

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

Brotherton v. Hart, 11 Cal. 405 (Cal. 1858).

11 Cal. 405 (Brotherton v. Hart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gallegos v. Kia Motors CA4/3
California Court of Appeal, 2014
Gibson v. Berryman
111 P. 926 (California Court of Appeal, 1910)
Hibernia Savings Etc. Soc. v. Waymire
92 P. 645 (California Supreme Court, 1907)
City & County San Francisco v. Certain Real Estate
42 Cal. 513 (California Supreme Court, 1872)
Mecham v. McKay
37 Cal. 154 (California Supreme Court, 1869)