Lone Star Co. v. West Point Co.

California Supreme Court

Lone Star Co. v. West Point Co.

5 Cal. 447

DecidedJuly 1, 1855

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Cal. 447 (Lone Star Co. v. West Point Co.) 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

Lone Star Co. v. West Point Co., 5 Cal. 447 (Cal. 1855).

Pincite

Opinion

Murray, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court-

Heydenfeldt, J., concurred.

This case comes before us in such an unsatisfactory manner, that it is almost impossible to decide it.

The only errors appearing on the record, are in the admission of evidence, and scarce sufficient testimony is set out to show the relevency or materiality of that which was excluded.

On the trial of the case, the plaintiffs, to establish the priority of their location, offered as a witness one James H. Berry, and proposed to prove certain receipts, signed by him as water agent, for water purchased by the Lone Star Company, which receipts were excluded by the Court. This was a controversy as to location, and it seems to me that the receipts should have gone to the jury, as tending to show the existence of the Company, and that it had actually located and was in operation at the time the receipts purport to have been signed.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered.

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

Murray, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court-

Heydenfeldt, J., concurred.

This case comes before us in such an unsatisfactory manner, that it is almost impossible to decide it.

The only errors appearing on the record, are in the admission of evidence, and scarce sufficient testimony is set out to show the relevency or materiality of that which was excluded.

On the trial of the case, the plaintiffs, to establish the priority of their location, offered as a witness one James H. Berry, and proposed to prove certain receipts, signed by him as water agent, for water purchased by the Lone Star Company, which receipts were excluded by the Court. This was a controversy as to location, and it seems to me that the receipts should have gone to the jury, as tending to show the existence of the Company, and that it had actually located and was in operation at the time the receipts purport to have been signed.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Cal. 447, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lone-star-co-v-west-point-co-cal-1855.