Clark v. His Creditors

California Supreme Court

Clark v. His Creditors

57 Cal. 639

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1881

DocketNo. 7,492

StatusPublished

This text of 57 Cal. 639 (Clark v. His Creditors) 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

Clark v. His Creditors, 57 Cal. 639 (Cal. 1881).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court :

Appellant says, first, that the jury were guilty of misconduct; second, that the evidence did not justify the verdict; third, that error occurred in the giving of instructions.

1. There was no evidence of misconduct in the jury-room, other than the affidavit of jurors. A juror cannot impeach his own verdict. (Polhemus v. Heiman, 50 Cal. 433, 441.)

2. There was a substantial conflict in the testimony.

3. The instructions were not. excepted to.

Judgment and order affirmed.

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

The Court :

Appellant says, first, that the jury were guilty of misconduct; second, that the evidence did not justify the verdict; third, that error occurred in the giving of instructions.

1. There was no evidence of misconduct in the jury-room, other than the affidavit of jurors. A juror cannot impeach his own verdict. (Polhemus v. Heiman, 50 Cal. 433, 441.)

2. There was a substantial conflict in the testimony.

3. The instructions were not. excepted to.

Judgment and order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 Cal. 639, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clark-v-his-creditors-cal-1881.

Opinion

2. There was a substantial conflict in the testimony.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack