Hershey v. Kness

California Supreme Court

Hershey v. Kness

16 P. 548, 75 Cal. 115, 1888 Cal. LEXIS 489

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 14, 1888

DocketNo. 12240

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 16 P. 548 (Hershey v. Kness) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hershey v. Kness, 16 P. 548, 75 Cal. 115, 1888 Cal. LEXIS 489 (Cal. 1888).

Pincite

Opinion

Hayne, C.

All the appellant’s specifications were stricken from the transcript, for the reason that they were mere interpolations, and not a part of the statement as settled by the judge of the court below. This took away all right to be heard on the motion for new trial.

The appellant’s objections to the sufficiency of the complaint are without merit.

We therefore advise that the judgment and order be affirmed.

Foote, C., and Belcher, C. 0., concurred.

The Court.

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the judgment and order are affirmed.

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