From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Buckelew v. Chipman

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1855
5 Cal. 399 (Cal. 1855)

Opinion

         Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, Marin County.

         COUNSEL:

         Halleck, Peachy, Billings & Park, and E. W. F. Sloan, for Appellant.

          John S. Chipman and Martin & Dwinelle for Respondent.


         No authorities were cited by counsel.

         JUDGES: Heydenfeldt, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Murray, C. J., and Bryan, J., concurred.

         OPINION

          HEYDENFELDT, Judge

         This is a bill in equity for relief against a judgment at law, and a new trial on account of newly discovered evidence.

         The rule in such cases is, that to entitle the complainant to relief, the newly discovered evidence must appear to be incontrovertible and conclusive.

         In this case it consists of the testimony of one witness, whereas the bill states that the judgment at law was obtained upon the testimony of two witnesses, and the issue was upon a single fact. The just inference is, that upon a new trial the result of the issue would be the same.

         Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Buckelew v. Chipman

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1855
5 Cal. 399 (Cal. 1855)
Case details for

Buckelew v. Chipman

Case Details

Full title:Benjamin R. Buckelew, Appellant, v. William W. Chipman, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Oct 1, 1855

Citations

5 Cal. 399 (Cal. 1855)

Citing Cases

San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co, Inc. v. Stevinson

Such bills have been frequently entertained in this state and treated as a proper subject of equity…

Kidd v. Laird

         A water right in the mineral region is acquired and continued as an incident to the occupation of…