Winans v. Hardenbergh

California Supreme Court

Winans v. Hardenbergh

8 Cal. 291

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1857

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 8 Cal. 291 (Winans v. Hardenbergh) 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

Winans v. Hardenbergh, 8 Cal. 291 (Cal. 1857).

Pincite

Opinion

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

The only exception taken by appellant in the Court below, was to the refusal of the Court to instruct the jury, as in case of non-suit, upon the close of the plaintiff’s testimony. If this were an error, it was cured by the introduction of evidence on the part of defendants, which supplied every omission in plaintiff’s case, and conclusively established his right to recover. Smith v. Compton, Jan. T., 1856. The appeal is without merit, and was evidently taken for delay.

Judgment affirmed, with ten per cent, damages, and costs.

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 only exception taken by appellant in the Court below, was to the refusal of the Court to instruct the jury, as in case of non-suit, upon the close of the plaintiff’s testimony. If this were an error, it was cured by the introduction of evidence on the part of defendants, which supplied every omission in plaintiff’s case, and conclusively established his right to recover. Smith v. Compton, Jan. T., 1856. The appeal is without merit, and was evidently taken for delay.

Judgment affirmed, with ten per cent, damages, and costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 Cal. 291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winans-v-hardenbergh-cal-1857.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack