Chipman v. Hibbard

8 Cal. 268
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1857
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 8 Cal. 268 (Chipman v. Hibbard) 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
Chipman v. Hibbard, 8 Cal. 268 (Cal. 1857).

Opinion

Burnett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Terry, C. J., concurring.

This is a bill in equity for a new trial, in an action of ejectment, on the ground of excessive damages, the remedy by motion for a new trial having been lost, without the fault, as is alleged, of the plaintiff. The ejectment suit was tried in the [271]*271Third District Court, and this bill is filed in the Fourth District Court.

We decided in the late case of Ricketts and Wife v. Johnson and others, that a Court of co-ordinate jurisdiction could not entertain proceedings to restrain the judgments of another. The plaintiffs should have proceeded before the District Court of the Third District.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Cochrane v. McDonald
5 Coffey 235 (California Superior Court, San Francisco County, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 Cal. 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chipman-v-hibbard-cal-1857.