Cleland v. Thornton

43 Cal. 437
California Supreme Court·Decided April 15, 1872·No. No. 2,946·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

By the Court,

Crockett, J.:

There was no error in the ruling of the Court admitting the evidence as to the cost of new buildings to replace those which were burned. The evidence was admissible as furnishing some data by which the Court would be enabled to estimate approximately the valué of the old buildings; and it is evident from the opinion and order of the Court, that it [439]*439was received and considered for this purpose only, and not as affording a criterion of damages. The evidence as to the character of the timber for milling purposes in that immediate neighborhood was also admissible under the pleadings, when it was offered. But, whether strictly admissible or not, it is apparent from the findings, and from the opinion and order of the Court denying a new trial, that it did the defendants no harm. Nor can we disturb the judgment on the ground that the findings were not justified by the evidence, which was quite sufficient to warrant the conclusion that the damage to the plaintiff’s property was caused by the negligence of the defendants, as charged in the complaint.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Cleland v. Thornton, 43 Cal. 437 (Cal. 1872).

43 Cal. 437 (Cleland v. Thornton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Central Mutual Insurance v. Schmidt
313 P.2d 132 (California Court of Appeal, 1957)
City of Los Angeles v. Cole
170 P.2d 928 (California Supreme Court, 1946)
Williams v. Faria
297 P. 78 (California Court of Appeal, 1931)
Mobile & Ohio Railroad v. Keith
6 Tenn. App. 18 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1927)
State v. Clark
50 So. 811 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1909)
Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Nitsche
9 L.R.A. 750 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1890)
White v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R'y Co.
9 L.R.A. 824 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1890)
Williams v. Missouri Furnace Co.
13 Mo. App. 70 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1882)