Gately v. Irvine
51 Cal. 172
Opinion
We think the court below was mistaken in supposing that the oral evidence rejected contradicted the record. . It only went to prove when the record was made.
The statement was filed and settled, which is the equivalent of “ settled and filed.”
Judgment and order reversed and cause remanded for a new trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Gately v. Irvine, 51 Cal. 172 (Cal. 1875).
51 Cal. 172 (Gately v. Irvine) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Grand Avenue Super Market, Inc. v. Tax Commission
377 P.2d 880 (Washington Supreme Court, 1963)
Cowles Publishing Co. v. McMann
172 P.2d 235 (Washington Supreme Court, 1946)
Levy v. Dusenbery
163 P. 231 (California Court of Appeal, 1916)
Merrill v. Sypert
44 S.W. 462 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1898)
Brady v. Bartlett
56 Cal. 350 (California Supreme Court, 1880)