Prader v. Merchant

1 Cal. Unrep. 138
California Supreme Court·Decided June 6, 1864·No. No. 3486·Published

Opinion

SHAFTER, J.

This is an appeal from an order refusing to change the place of trial. The change was moved for by the defendants, and on the ground that they were residents of the county of Sonoma, to which county they sought to have the case transferred from Sacramento county, where the action was brought.

The plaintiff resisted the motion on the ground that the convenience of witnesses required that the case should be tried in the county of Sacramento.

On inspecting the affidavits used on the hearing of the motion in the district court, we are satisfied that there was no [139] abuse of discretion on the part of the court in denying the motion: Sloan v. Smith, 3 Cal. 410; People v. Fisher, 6 Cal. 154; Loehr v. Latham, 15 Cal. 418.

The order is affirmed.

We concur: Sanderson, C. J.; Sawyer, J.; Currey, J.; Rhodes, J.

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

Prader v. Merchant, 1 Cal. Unrep. 138 (Cal. 1864).

1 Cal. Unrep. 138 (Prader v. Merchant) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sloan v. Smith
3 Cal. 410 (California Supreme Court, 1853)
People v. Fisher
6 Cal. 154 (California Supreme Court, 1856)
Loehr v. Latham
15 Cal. 418 (California Supreme Court, 1860)