Cross v. Zane

California Supreme Court

Cross v. Zane

45 Cal. 89

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Cross v. Zane. Read the opinion of the Court — 47 Cal. 602 →

California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1872·No. No. 3,283·Published

Opinion

By the Court:

The order, which is the subject of the appeal in this case, was not made upon affidavits alone, and it therefore does not [90]*90fall within the exception in section three hundred and forty-three of the Practice Act. Under the provisions of the Practice Act and the rule upon the subject announced in JELaggin v. Clark, 28 Cal. 162, and uniformly adhered to since, we cannot disturb the order upon the record before us, and it is therefore affirmed.

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

By the Court:

The order, which is the subject of the appeal in this case, was not made upon affidavits alone, and it therefore does not [90]*90fall within the exception in section three hundred and forty-three of the Practice Act. Under the provisions of the Practice Act and the rule upon the subject announced in JELaggin v. Clark, 28 Cal. 162, and uniformly adhered to since, we cannot disturb the order upon the record before us, and it is therefore affirmed.

Cross v. Zane, 45 Cal. 89 (Cal. 1872).

Pincite

45 Cal. 89 (Cross v. Zane) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related