Schmidt v. Yoakum

California Court of Appeal

Schmidt v. Yoakum

39 Cal. App. 790

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedDecember 9, 1918

DocketCiv. No. 2596; Civ. No. 2597

StatusPublished

This text of 39 Cal. App. 790 (Schmidt v. Yoakum) 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

Schmidt v. Yoakum, 39 Cal. App. 790 (Cal. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

CONREY, P. J.

In each of these eases the plaintiff appeals from an order granting a motion for a new trial. The only questions presented for determination are included among those considered by this court in Schmidt v. Santa Monica Commercial Co., ante, p. 785, [178 Pac. 315], in which the decision of the court has been this day filed. [1] On the authority of that decision, the orders granting the motions for new trial in the above-entitled actions numbered 2596 and 2597 are and each of them is affirmed.

James, J., and Myers, J., pro tern., concurred.

[791]*791A petition to have the causes heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on February 6, 1919.

All the Justices concurred.

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

CONREY, P. J.

In each of these eases the plaintiff appeals from an order granting a motion for a new trial. The only questions presented for determination are included among those considered by this court in Schmidt v. Santa Monica Commercial Co., ante, p. 785, [178 Pac. 315], in which the decision of the court has been this day filed. [1] On the authority of that decision, the orders granting the motions for new trial in the above-entitled actions numbered 2596 and 2597 are and each of them is affirmed.

James, J., and Myers, J., pro tern., concurred.

[791]*791A petition to have the causes heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on February 6, 1919.

All the Justices concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 Cal. App. 790, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schmidt-v-yoakum-calctapp-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack