County of White Pine v. Herrick

19 Nev. 311
Nevada Supreme Court·Decided January 15, 1886·No. No. 1234·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

By the Court,

Belknap, C. J.:

This appeal is taken from a judgment of nonsuit entered upon defendants’ motion. The statement on appeal does not purport to contain all of the evidence adduced at the trial. This court has repeatedly held that a judgment of the district court will not be disturbed as being unsupported by the evidence when the statement fails to affirmatively show that it contains all of the material evidence. (Sherwood v. Sissa, 5 Nev. 349; Bowker v. Goodwin, 7 Nev. 135; Libby v. Dalton, 9 Nev. 23; Sherman v. Shaw, Id. 148; Mandlebaum v. Liebes, 17 Nev. 131; Caples v. C. P. R. R. Co., 6 Nev. 265.) In the absence of such showing, the court has uniformly indulged the presumption that the facts necessary to sustain the ruling were established at the trial. It results that the question of insufficiency of the evidence cannot be reviewed.

The only subject remaining for examination is the judgment roll, in which no error appears or is claimed. Judgment affirmed.

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

County of White Pine v. Herrick, 19 Nev. 311 (Neb. 1886).

19 Nev. 311 (County of White Pine v. Herrick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fenkell v. Fenkell
469 P.2d 701 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1970)
Love v. Mt. Oddie United Mines Co.
181 P. 133 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1919)
Stoddard v. Fox
99 P. 122 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1909)
Olson v. Oregon Short Line Railroad
68 P. 148 (Utah Supreme Court, 1902)