Budd v. Drais

50 Cal. 120, 1875 Cal. LEXIS 103
California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1875·No. No. 2279·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

By the Court, Temple, J.:

The District Court granted a new trial, but the record does not show that a motion for new trial was ever made, nor is there an agreed or settled statement on such motion, or any affidavits, as required by the Practice Act. The transcript contains what purports to be a statement on motion for a new trial, but it is neither settled nor agreed to, nor does it contain any specifications whatever of the grounds upon which the moving party relies. The statement should have been disregarded for both reasons given.

The order granting a new trial is reversed, and cause remanded.

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

Budd v. Drais, 50 Cal. 120, 1875 Cal. LEXIS 103 (Cal. 1875).

50 Cal. 120 (Budd v. Drais) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fawkes v. Reynolds
211 P. 449 (California Supreme Court, 1922)
MacHado v. Kinney
67 P. 331 (California Supreme Court, 1902)
Leonard v. Shaw
45 P. 1012 (California Supreme Court, 1896)
Slater v. Union Pacific Railway Co.
8 Utah 178 (Utah Supreme Court, 1892)