Hoppe v. Robb
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] "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
1 Cal. 373 (Hoppe v. Robb) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.