Crook v. Forsyth

California Supreme Court

Crook v. Forsyth

30 Cal. 662

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1866

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 30 Cal. 662 (Crook v. Forsyth) 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

Crook v. Forsyth, 30 Cal. 662 (Cal. 1866).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court, Shafter, J. :

A new trial was asked for below on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the decision of the Court on the merits.

The burden of proof under the issues jóined was upon the [663]*663defendant, and his testimony was so far inconsistent with itself that the Court, acting advisedly, could not, in our judgment, have come to any other conclusion than it did. There was a conflict in the testimony, and it was all the more fatal for being intestine.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Sanderson expressed no opinion.

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

By the Court, Shafter, J. :

A new trial was asked for below on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the decision of the Court on the merits.

The burden of proof under the issues jóined was upon the [663]*663defendant, and his testimony was so far inconsistent with itself that the Court, acting advisedly, could not, in our judgment, have come to any other conclusion than it did. There was a conflict in the testimony, and it was all the more fatal for being intestine.

Judgment affirmed.

Mr. Justice Sanderson expressed no opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 Cal. 662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crook-v-forsyth-cal-1866.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack