Skillman v. Riley
This text of 10 Cal. 300 (Skillman v. Riley) 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
Terry, C. J., and Baldwin, J., concurring.
The papers embodied in the transcript, purporting to be a statement, are subject to the objection taken in Marlow v. Marsh, (9 Cal., 259.) The draft prepared by the appellant, and the [301]*301amendments proposed by the respondent, and allowed by the Judge who tried the cause, are not incorporated into one document, and in their separate form do not constitute such a statement as we will notice on appeal. This was expressly decided in the case cited, and in People v. Edwards, (9 Cal., 291.) The judgment-roll is, therefore, the only record properly before us, and this does not disclose any error in the action of the Court below.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
10 Cal. 300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skillman-v-riley-cal-1858.