Thompson v. Danforth

1 Cal. Unrep. 28
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedMay 19, 1856
DocketNo. 1037
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 1 Cal. Unrep. 28 (Thompson v. Danforth) 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
Thompson v. Danforth, 1 Cal. Unrep. 28 (Cal. 1856).

Opinion

MURRAY, C. J.

— This cause was tried in the court below, . by consent of parties, by an attorney and not by the judge. The defendants moved for a new trial, upon a statement signed by the person who tried the cause, which order was granted by the judge of the court. It is now insisted that the statement was inadmissible for the purposes of the motion on this appeal. The whole proceeding was a nullity. But even if it was not, we would not allow a party to avoid the consequences of his agreement by availing himself of the fruits of a judgment and denying the legitimate consequences of it at the same time.

Judgment affirmed.

I concur: Terry, J.

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

Related

In Re Damian
197 Cal. App. 3d 933 (California Court of Appeal, 1988)
Merced County Department of Human Resources v. Maria V.
197 Cal. App. 3d 933 (California Court of Appeal, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Cal. Unrep. 28, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompson-v-danforth-cal-1856.