Hoppe v. Robb
This text of 1 Cal. 373 (Hoppe v. Robb) 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.
Opinion
By the Court,
The action was for money loaned. The question for determination at the trial was whether the money was advanced as a loan, or by way of subscription for the purpose of establishing a newspaper at San José. There was conflicting evidence upon this point, and the judge of the district court found that the money was advanced as a subscription.
[374]*374"We bare frequently held that we would not review the verdict of a jury upon a question of fact, where there was conflicting or contradictory evidence, upon which the verdict was based. The same rule applies to the finding of a judge, to whom a question of fact is submitted, and upon which he has passed. The j udgme-nt in this cause must, therefore, be affirmed.
Ordered accordingly.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Cal. 373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoppe-v-robb-cal-1851.