Davis v. Hart

37 P. 486, 103 Cal. 530, 1894 Cal. LEXIS 817
California Supreme Court·Decided August 13, 1894·No. No. 19401·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Fitzgerald, J.

There is no brief on file by respondent, nor was the case orally argued in his behalf. ■

As the record shows that the findings are attacked by the specifications on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to support them, it follows on the authority of Richter v. Fresno Canal etc. Co., 101 Cal. 582, that the judgment and order appealed from should be reversed.

So ordered.

McFarland, J., and De Haven, J., concurred.

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

Davis v. Hart, 37 P. 486, 103 Cal. 530, 1894 Cal. LEXIS 817 (Cal. 1894).

37 P. 486 (Davis v. Hart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Citizens National Trust & Savings Bank v. Scott
222 Cal. App. 2d 718 (California Court of Appeal, 1963)
Duisenberg-Wichman & Co. v. Johnson
7 P.2d 1081 (California Court of Appeal, 1932)
Lutz v. Merchants Nat. Bank
177 P. 158 (California Supreme Court, 1918)
Bullock v. Bullock
155 P. 1009 (California Court of Appeal, 1916)
Rudd v. Wilson
1912 OK 147 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)
Butler v. McSpadden
1910 OK 5 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1910)
Nettograph Machine Co. v. Brown and Trueblood
1907 OK 83 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1907)
Contra Costa Water Co. v. Breed
73 P. 189 (California Supreme Court, 1903)
Kelly v. Bradbury
37 P. 872 (California Supreme Court, 1894)