Levy v. Baldwin

California Supreme Court

Levy v. Baldwin

7 P. 683, 2 Cal. Unrep. 509

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 31, 1885

DocketNo. 8980

StatusPublished

This text of 7 P. 683 (Levy v. Baldwin) 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

Levy v. Baldwin, 7 P. 683, 2 Cal. Unrep. 509 (Cal. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

By the COURT.

The court properly exercised its discretion in refusing a second postponement of the trial, and refusing the amendment to the answer asked for at the trial. The charge of the court was correct, and the request to charge was properly refused. We find no error in admitting the evidence of plaintiff that the stock mentioned in the complaint was purchased for defendant through E. H. Hall & Co.

There is no error in the record and the judgment is affirmed.

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

By the COURT.

The court properly exercised its discretion in refusing a second postponement of the trial, and refusing the amendment to the answer asked for at the trial. The charge of the court was correct, and the request to charge was properly refused. We find no error in admitting the evidence of plaintiff that the stock mentioned in the complaint was purchased for defendant through E. H. Hall & Co.

There is no error in the record and the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 P. 683, 2 Cal. Unrep. 509, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levy-v-baldwin-cal-1885.