Hoyt v. Saunders

4 Cal. 345
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1854
StatusPublished

This text of 4 Cal. 345 (Hoyt v. Saunders) 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
Hoyt v. Saunders, 4 Cal. 345 (Cal. 1854).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Oh. J. Murray.

Mr. J. Heydenfeldt concurred.

[348]*348We are of opinion that the District Court should have granted a new trial in this case, on the ground of newly discovered evidence.

The report of the referee discloses some hesitation and doubt in arriving at the conclusions of fact, and his [348] supplemental *report shows that, if such newly discovered evidence had been adduced on the trial, the result, in all probability, would have been different. Under such circumstsnces, the ends of justice would be better preserved by a new trial.

Ordered accordingly.

Respondent petitioned for a rehearing, which was denied.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 Cal. 345, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoyt-v-saunders-cal-1854.