Kellogg v. Kellogg

148 P. 518, 170 Cal. 84, 1915 Cal. LEXIS 359
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedApril 19, 1915
DocketL.A. No. 3461.
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 148 P. 518 (Kellogg v. Kellogg) 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
Kellogg v. Kellogg, 148 P. 518, 170 Cal. 84, 1915 Cal. LEXIS 359 (Cal. 1915).

Opinion

At the time set for hearing the parties filed a stipulation that the cause might be submitted without oral argument.

Shaw, J., delivered the opinion of the court, Sloss, J., and Lawlor, J., concurring.

The court has examined the briefs and in the absence of the parties will proceed to determine the case without further delay.

The action is brought by the husband against the wife, to obtain a divorce. The appeal is from an order made by the court during the progress of the case, requiring the husband to pay to the wife certain sums of money for counsel fees and for expenses in traveling from Michigan to San Diego to attend the trial. It is claimed on the part of the appellant, the husband, that the evidence taken by the court does not show any proof of the husband’s abilities. In the condition *85 of the record we cannot assent to this proposition. The case comes within the principle, so often stated, that a judgment or order will not be reversed unless error is shown and that the burden is upon the appellant to show the error. An affidavit of the wife was introduced and set out in full. It refers to and makes a part thereof another affidavit made by her in a previous case between the parties for the same cause. The record shows that the affidavit in the other case, which was referred to in the affidavit filed, was received and considered by the court, but the transcript does not set forth its contents. There is nothing in the record to show its contents or the facts it proved or tended to prove. Under the rule just stated, the court, on appeal, must assume that it contained facts sufficient to support the order of the court below. For that reason the order of the court will have to be affirmed.

The order is affirmed.

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

Related

Walker v. Walker
285 P.2d 590 (Montana Supreme Court, 1955)
Stevens v. Stevens
276 P.2d 139 (California Court of Appeal, 1954)
Dalton v. Gore
263 P. 844 (California Court of Appeal, 1928)
Locke Paddon v. Locke Paddon
227 P. 715 (California Supreme Court, 1924)
Davis v. Mene
198 P. 840 (California Court of Appeal, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
148 P. 518, 170 Cal. 84, 1915 Cal. LEXIS 359, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kellogg-v-kellogg-cal-1915.