Kiel v. Reay

50 Cal. 61, 1875 Cal. LEXIS 83
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 1, 1875
DocketNo. 4445
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 50 Cal. 61 (Kiel v. Reay) 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
Kiel v. Reay, 50 Cal. 61, 1875 Cal. LEXIS 83 (Cal. 1875).

Opinions

By the Court, Crockett, J.:

A jury was called to try the issues in the cause; one of which was, whether the plaintiff was the holder and owner of the promissory notes sued upon. At the trial certain special issues were submitted to the jury by consent, with instructions to find a special verdict on these issues. The special issues so submitted did not include the issue made [63]*63by the pleadings as to whether the plaintiff was the holder and owner of the notes; and the verdict responded only to the special issues submitted, there being no general verdict. Thereupon the defendant moved for judgment on the verdict, and the motion having been granted, a judgment was entered for the defendant, from which the plaintiff appeals. If it be assumed that the plaintiff was the holder and owner of the notes, the special facts found by the jury did not constitute a defense to the action, the property having been conveyed to Schumacher only by way of security, and not in payment, and that portion of it conveyed by the latter to Rosenfeld having also been conveyed in the same way.

But the issue as to the plaintiff’s ownership of the notes was not determined by the verdict. This material issue of fact raised by the pleadings has not been decided, and until it has been determined the case is not in a condition for judgment. There has been simply a mistrial, and until the issues of fact are decided no final judgment can be entered. (Chamberlain v. Dempsey, 14 Abb. Pr. R. 241; Griffin v. Cranston, 5 Bosw. 658; Kintz v. McNeal, 1 Denio, 436; Eisemann v. Swan, 6 Bosw. 668; Manning v. Monaghan, 23 N. Y. 539.)

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

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

Related

Calvert v. Anderson
254 P. 184 (Montana Supreme Court, 1927)
San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. Stevenson
158 P. 768 (California Court of Appeal, 1916)
Coburn Cattle Co. v. Small
88 P. 953 (Montana Supreme Court, 1907)
Ward v. Gradin
109 N.W. 57 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1906)
Sonnesyn v. Akin
104 N.W. 1026 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1905)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 Cal. 61, 1875 Cal. LEXIS 83, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kiel-v-reay-cal-1875.