Scannell v. Strahle

California Supreme Court

Scannell v. Strahle

9 Cal. 177

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1858

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 9 Cal. 177 (Scannell v. Strahle) 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

Scannell v. Strahle, 9 Cal. 177 (Cal. 1858).

Pincite

Opinion

Terry, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Burnett, J., concurring.

The findings in this case, which are supported by the evidence, fully sustain the judgment; and wo have often held that we will not disturb the findings of a Court or jury on account of conflicting evidence.

The testimony offered by defendants, to prove ownership in the property, was properly rejected, because entirely inconsistent with the declarations and admissions of defendants, made at the time the plaintiff was induced to permit the property to remain in their possession until called for,

Judgment affirmed.

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

Terry, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Burnett, J., concurring.

The findings in this case, which are supported by the evidence, fully sustain the judgment; and wo have often held that we will not disturb the findings of a Court or jury on account of conflicting evidence.

The testimony offered by defendants, to prove ownership in the property, was properly rejected, because entirely inconsistent with the declarations and admissions of defendants, made at the time the plaintiff was induced to permit the property to remain in their possession until called for,

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 Cal. 177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scannell-v-strahle-cal-1858.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack