Miller v. Carlisle

California Supreme Court

Miller v. Carlisle

127 Cal. 331

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 29, 1899

DocketSac. No. 560

StatusPublished

This text of 127 Cal. 331 (Miller v. Carlisle) 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

Miller v. Carlisle, 127 Cal. 331 (Cal. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

This appeal is hy the defendant Boggs from the personal judgment in the action rendered against him and his codefendant Carlisle. The facts necessary to an understanding of the case are stated in the opinion rendered on the appeal (Sac. No. 584, ante, p. 327) from the order denying the motion of Carlisle for new trial. For the reasons there given it appears that the court helow had no jurisdiction to render the judgment appealed from; the judgment is also erroneous in that it awards a recovery in favor of the plaintiffs jointly, their demands being several; it is therefore reversed.

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

THE COURT.

This appeal is hy the defendant Boggs from the personal judgment in the action rendered against him and his codefendant Carlisle. The facts necessary to an understanding of the case are stated in the opinion rendered on the appeal (Sac. No. 584, ante, p. 327) from the order denying the motion of Carlisle for new trial. For the reasons there given it appears that the court helow had no jurisdiction to render the judgment appealed from; the judgment is also erroneous in that it awards a recovery in favor of the plaintiffs jointly, their demands being several; it is therefore reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 Cal. 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-carlisle-cal-1899.