City of Los Angeles v. Mellus
This text of 58 Cal. 19 (City of Los Angeles v. Mellus) 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.
Opinion
It was stipulated that the transcript in case No. 6,841, supra, in this Court should constitute the transcript on this appeal. The appellant in this appeal is one of the defendants in the action in which that appeal was taken, and the facts are the-same, except that the Court below rendered judgment against this appellant.
The Court found the rendition of the former judgment. The record before us does not show that the finding was not sustained by the evidence. (See opinion in case No. 6,841, supra.) The former judgment was a bar to this action, it being found to be for the same cause of action. (Robinson v. Howard, 5 Cal. 428; Terry v. Hammonds, 47 id. 35; Aurora City v. West, 7 Wall. 99; Kimbro v. V. R. R., 56 Ga. 187; Wells’ Res. Adj. 371.)
Judgment reversed.
McKee, J., and Thornton, J., dissented.
Ross, J., being disqualified, took no part in the decision.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
58 Cal. 19, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-los-angeles-v-mellus-cal-1881.