Fitzpatrick v. Fitch

23 P. 531, 83 Cal. 490, 1890 Cal. LEXIS 714
California Supreme Court·Decided March 31, 1890·No. No. 12686·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Foote, C.

— This is an appeal from an order changing the place of the trial of an action.

The papers in the transcript upon which the action of the court below is alleged to have been based are not shown, either by bill of exceptions or certificate of the judge, to have been used on the hearing of the motion, which was granted.

The certificate of the clerk appended to the transcript is in no sense such identification as is necessary. (Von Glahn v. Brennan, 81 Cal. 261-264; Walsh v. Hutchings, 60 Cal. 228, 229; Nash v. Harris, 57 Cal. 243, 244; Larkin v. Larkin, 76 Cal. 323, 324.)

And the presumption is that the action of the court below was correct. We therefore advise that the order be affirmed.

Hayne, C., and Belcher, G. C., concurred.

The Court.

For the reasons given in the foregoing

opinion, the order is affirmed.

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

Fitzpatrick v. Fitch, 23 P. 531, 83 Cal. 490, 1890 Cal. LEXIS 714 (Cal. 1890).

23 P. 531 (Fitzpatrick v. Fitch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lesure v. Hutton
199 P. 549 (California Court of Appeal, 1921)