Keys v. Warner

45 Cal. 60
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1872
DocketNo. 3,349
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 45 Cal. 60 (Keys v. Warner) 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
Keys v. Warner, 45 Cal. 60 (Cal. 1872).

Opinion

By the Court:

The judgment of the Court below purports to have been rendered in pursuance of the stipulation of the attorneys of the respective parties, and there can be no just pretense that the stipulation did not fully authorize the judgment entered.

Nor do we think the Court erred in vacating the order submitting the motion to set aside the Judgment and allowing further affidavits to .be filed. After a cause has been submitted to a Court for a judgment, it lies very much within its discretion whether the case may be reopened for the mere purpose of hearing further testimony. But, if there were error in vacating the order submitting the motion, that error was waived by the defendants when they availed themselves of the permission given to file an affidavit in their own behalf. There being no error in receiving the affidavits, there could, of course, be none in afterwards' considering them/ i

By the terms of the stipulation the judgment was to be set aside in case a certain certiorari case, then pending in this Court against the Supervisors of Marin County,, should be finally decided for the defendant, “ upon the ground that the highway mentioned therein is established.” The record shows that the certiorari case referred to was decided for the [63]*63defendant and the writ dismissed, but not upon the ground or for the reason named in the stipulation.

The parties having made their own stipulation, we cannot alter it or change its terms, or relieve the defendants from its obvious consequences.

Judgment and order affirmed.

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

Related

N. Santini & Co. v. Polanco
31 P.R. 838 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1923)
Reeves Realty Co. v. Brown
1915 OK 126 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1915)
Adams v. Hartzell
119 N.W. 635 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1909)
Clavey v. Lord
25 P. 493 (California Supreme Court, 1891)
Coleman v. Coleman
5 Haw. 300 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1885)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
45 Cal. 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keys-v-warner-cal-1872.