Offer v. McMillan

226 P.2d 380, 101 Cal. App. 2d 840, 1951 Cal. App. LEXIS 1102
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal
DecidedJanuary 23, 1951
DocketCiv. No. 7920
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 226 P.2d 380 (Offer v. McMillan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Offer v. McMillan, 226 P.2d 380, 101 Cal. App. 2d 840, 1951 Cal. App. LEXIS 1102 (Cal. Ct. App. 1951).

Opinion

DEIRUP, J. pro tem.

The plaintiffs have appealed [841]*841error. There is no basis for a discussion of this point, for we cannot take the opinion into account. “The findings and conclusions constitute the final decision of the court and an oral or written opinion cannot be resorted to for the purpose of impeaching or gainsaying the findings and judgment.” (Buckhantz v. R. G. Hamilton & Co., 71 Cal.App.2d 777, 781 [163 P.2d 756].)

The judgment is affirmed. Appeal from order denying new trial dismissed.

Adams, P. J., and Peek, J., concurred.

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

Related

Develop-Amatic Engineering v. REPUBLIC MORTGAGE
12 Cal. App. 3d 143 (California Court of Appeal, 1970)
Develop-Amatic Engineering v. Republic Mortgage Co.
12 Cal. App. 3d 143 (California Court of Appeal, 1970)
Perry v. Jacobsen
184 Cal. App. 2d 43 (California Court of Appeal, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
226 P.2d 380, 101 Cal. App. 2d 840, 1951 Cal. App. LEXIS 1102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/offer-v-mcmillan-calctapp-1951.