Meerholz v. Sessions
9 Cal. 277
This text of 9 Cal. 277 (Meerholz v. Sessions) 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
Meerholz v. Sessions, 9 Cal. 277 (Cal. 1858).
Opinion
The statement embodied in the record was filed on the motion for a new trial, and we can only examine the action of the Court [278]*278below in denying the motion. As the order was entered by consent, we cannot hear any objection to it on appeal.
Judgment affirmed, with twenty per cent, damages.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Fowler v. Fowler
272 P.2d 546 (California Court of Appeal, 1954)
Gibson v. Berryman
111 P. 926 (California Court of Appeal, 1910)
Hibernia Savings Etc. Soc. v. Waymire
92 P. 645 (California Supreme Court, 1907)
Brotherton v. Hart
11 Cal. 405 (California Supreme Court, 1858)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
9 Cal. 277, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meerholz-v-sessions-cal-1858.