Eddy v. Eddy

San Fran. Dist Ct

Eddy v. Eddy

2 Cal. Dist. Ct. 126

DecidedFebruary 15, 1858

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Cal. Dist. Ct. 126 (Eddy v. Eddy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering San Fransisco District Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Eddy v. Eddy, 2 Cal. Dist. Ct. 126 (sfdistct 1858).

Pincite

Opinion

Hager, J.

— This action, upon the complaint and answer, was referred by consent of the parties, to take the testimony, try issues and report a finding to the court, but the referee has only reported the testimony. The case being at issue upon the complaint and answer under the order of reference, the proceedings before the referee should have been the same as upon issues of fact in any civil action, and in the manner in which they are ordinarily tried and reported upon, except that’fe testimony must be reported in full.

The action must be sent back to the referee for further report.

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

Hager, J.

— This action, upon the complaint and answer, was referred by consent of the parties, to take the testimony, try issues and report a finding to the court, but the referee has only reported the testimony. The case being at issue upon the complaint and answer under the order of reference, the proceedings before the referee should have been the same as upon issues of fact in any civil action, and in the manner in which they are ordinarily tried and reported upon, except that’fe testimony must be reported in full.

The action must be sent back to the referee for further report.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Cal. Dist. Ct. 126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eddy-v-eddy-sfdistct-1858.