Husband v. Hussey

California Court of Appeal

Husband v. Hussey

161 P. 1170, 32 Cal. App. 87, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 306

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 15, 1916

DocketCiv. No. 1801.

StatusPublished

This text of 161 P. 1170 (Husband v. Hussey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Husband v. Hussey, 161 P. 1170, 32 Cal. App. 87, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 306 (Cal. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

This is an appeal from a judgment in the sum of one thousand dollars entered in favor of the plaintiff in an action for the value of ten shares of the capital stock of a certain corporation which, it was alleged, the defendant for a valuable consideration had agreed to deliver to the plaintiff.

The evidence adduced upon the trial of the case was directed chiefly to the issue raised by the defendant’s answer as to whether or not he had agreed to deliver to the plaintiff any number of shares of the corporate stock in controversy in excess of the ten shares which the plaintiff’s complaint alleged that he had received pursuant to his agreement with the defendant.

No point of law is involved in the appeal. It is grounded solely in the contention that the finding of the trial court that the defendant had agreed to deliver twenty and not ten shares *88 of the stock in question is contrary to the preponderance of the evidence, which, upon that phase of the case, is in pronounced conflict; and we are requested by the appellant to weigh the evidence and consider the credibility of witnesses. This, of course, under the familiar rule, we cannot do.

The judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.

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

THE COURT.

This is an appeal from a judgment in the sum of one thousand dollars entered in favor of the plaintiff in an action for the value of ten shares of the capital stock of a certain corporation which, it was alleged, the defendant for a valuable consideration had agreed to deliver to the plaintiff.

The evidence adduced upon the trial of the case was directed chiefly to the issue raised by the defendant’s answer as to whether or not he had agreed to deliver to the plaintiff any number of shares of the corporate stock in controversy in excess of the ten shares which the plaintiff’s complaint alleged that he had received pursuant to his agreement with the defendant.

No point of law is involved in the appeal. It is grounded solely in the contention that the finding of the trial court that the defendant had agreed to deliver twenty and not ten shares *88 of the stock in question is contrary to the preponderance of the evidence, which, upon that phase of the case, is in pronounced conflict; and we are requested by the appellant to weigh the evidence and consider the credibility of witnesses. This, of course, under the familiar rule, we cannot do.

The judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 P. 1170, 32 Cal. App. 87, 1916 Cal. App. LEXIS 306, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/husband-v-hussey-calctapp-1916.