McGoldrick v. Visalia Midway Oil Co.

208 P. 334, 58 Cal. App. 280, 1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 303
California Court of Appeal·Decided June 22, 1922·No. Civ. No. 3852.·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

WORKS, J.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries and was tried without a jury, with the result that judgment went for defendant. Upon motion by plaintiff the court made its order granting a new trial of the cause. From this order defendant appeals.

Section 963 of the Code of Civil Procedure, before it was amended in 1915, provided that an appeal might be taken from “an order granting or refusing a new trial.” By the amendment of the year mentioned, the passage of the amendment long antedating the order now appealed from, this language was changed so as to permit an appeal only from “an order granting a new trial in an action or proceeding tried by a jury where such trial by jury is a matter of right.” The supreme court, in reciting the history of this amendment and of others affecting appeals, has said: “Separate appeals from orders granting new trials can be had only in those cases where a jury trial has been had as a matter of right” (Estate of Waters, 181 Cal. 584 [185 Pac. 951].)

Appeal dismissed.

Finlayson, P. J., and Craig, J., concurred.

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

McGoldrick v. Visalia Midway Oil Co., 208 P. 334, 58 Cal. App. 280, 1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 303 (Cal. Ct. App. 1922).

208 P. 334 (McGoldrick v. Visalia Midway Oil Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Treiman v. Kennon
139 Cal. App. 796 (Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California, 1934)
Dean v. Midland Farms Co.
274 P. 71 (California Court of Appeal, 1929)
Nason v. Shinjo
237 P. 559 (California Court of Appeal, 1925)