Walker v. Sedgwick
This text of 5 Cal. 192 (Walker v. Sedgwick) 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
Bryan, J., concurred.
The parties agree by stipulation to submit this case upon the single point, that the Judge below failed to find the facts and conclusions of law.
This is a case in Chancery to enforce a vender’s lien for the purchase money. In Chancery cases this Court has to examine the facts, and is not concluded by the findings of the Chancellor. The statute regulation does not therefore apply in such cases, because it would be utterly fruitless and lex non cogit ad vana. The statute was intended for cases in which the trial by the Judge supplied the place of a trial by jury, where the parties consent to it; and we have long ago determined that in Chancery cases the parties were not entitled to trial by jury.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
5 Cal. 192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walker-v-sedgwick-cal-1855.