Opinion
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, from an order refusing a new trial, and from an order refusing to amend the findings or make additional findings.
COUNSEL:
William H. Bate, Appellant in person.
B. S. Brooks, for Respondents.
OPINION
The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment and orders must be affirmed. The findings are sufficient to sustain the judgment and the statement on motion for new trial contains no sufficient specification of particulars wherein the findings are unsustained by the evidence. There is no affidavit in support of the alleged grounds of surprise and newly discovered evidence, which by statute is made essential to the granting of a motion for new trial on either of those grounds. And with respect to the plaintiff's motion to " amend and make additional findings," it is sufficient to say that this motion was made long after the entry of the judgment and the denial of the motion for a new trial.
Judgment and orders affirmed.