Santa Rosa City Railroad v. Central Street Railway Co.
This text of 44 P. 733 (Santa Rosa City Railroad v. Central Street Railway Co.) 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.
Opinion
In this cause it is impossible for a majority of the court to arrive at a conclusion upon the merits of the case, for the reason that the chief justice is disqualified, and, of the six associates, Justices Van Fleet, Garoutte, and McFarland think that the judg[437]*437ment of the lower court should be reversed for the reasons given in the former opinion of Justice Van Fleet (38 Pac. Rep. 986), and Justices Henshaw, Harrison, and Temple think that said judgment should be affirmed. The case has been twice argued in Bank— orally and by briefs—and frequent consultations have demonstrated that the differences of opinion among the said justices are permanent. Moreover, there is no probability of immediate change in the personnel of the court. Under these circumstances, we think that, upon the authority of Frankel v. Deidesheimer, 93 Cal. 73, and Luco v. De Toro, 88 Cal. 26, the judgment should be affirmed.
The judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.
Beatty, C. J., being disqualified, did not participate in the foregoing.
Rehearing denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
44 P. 733, 112 Cal. 436, 1896 Cal. LEXIS 697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/santa-rosa-city-railroad-v-central-street-railway-co-cal-1896.