Johnson v. Klein
11 P. 606, 70 Cal. 186, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 755
Opinion
It has been so often held here that a finding that all the averments of the complaint are true is a sufficient finding of facts that an appeal grounded on its [187] alleged insufficiency must be held to have been taken for delay. The answer contained nothing but denials and an admission of matters alleged in' the complaint, so that the finding that all of the allegations of the complaint are true necessarily covers all of the issues made by the pleadings.
Judgment affirmed, with fifty dollars• damages.
McKinstry, J., and Myrick, J., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Johnson v. Klein, 11 P. 606, 70 Cal. 186, 1886 Cal. LEXIS 755 (Cal. 1886).
11 P. 606 (Johnson v. Klein) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Lámar v. Lámar
30 Cal. 2d 898 (California Supreme Court, 1947)
Williams v. Neddo
163 P.2d 306 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1945)
Kendrick v. Gould
197 P. 681 (California Court of Appeal, 1921)
Pankey v. Ortiz
195 P. 906 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1921)
Continental National Bank v. Stoltz
189 P. 712 (California Court of Appeal, 1920)
Hammitt v. Virginia Mining Co.
181 P. 336 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1919)
Turner v. Cyrus
179 P. 279 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1919)
Adams v. Barber
132 P. 273 (California Court of Appeal, 1913)
McKelvey v. Wagy
108 P. 268 (California Supreme Court, 1910)
Chatfield v. Continental Building & Loan Ass'n
92 P. 1040 (California Court of Appeal, 1907)
Homeseekers Loan Association v. Gleeson
65 P. 617 (California Supreme Court, 1901)
Wolfskill v. Douglas
59 P. 987 (California Supreme Court, 1900)
Union Mill & Mining Co. v. Warren
82 F. 519 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada, 1897)
Gale v. Bradbury
47 P. 778 (California Supreme Court, 1897)
Paden v. Goldbaum
37 P. 759 (California Supreme Court, 1894)
Boyd v. Boyd
31 P. 1108 (California Supreme Court, 1893)
Williams v. Hall
21 P. 965 (California Supreme Court, 1889)
Gwinn v. Ton
17 P. 212 (California Supreme Court, 1888)