From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cross v. Tustin

Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Two
Feb 24, 1950
96 Cal.App.2d 207 (Cal. Ct. App. 1950)

Opinion

Docket No. 14426.

February 24, 1950.

PETITION to settle a narrative statement for use on appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County. M.G. Del Mutolo, Judge. Denied.

Nancy Cross in pro. per. for Appellant.

Howard C. Campen, County Counsel, and Harry C. Nail, Jr., Assistant County Counsel, for Respondents.


[1] The appellant petitions this court to settle a narrative statement for use on her appeal alleging, with supporting affidavits, that the statement as settled by the trial court is incorrect. Under the holding in Burns v. Brown, 27 Cal.2d 631 [ 166 P.2d 1] this court has no power to substitute its conclusion for that of the trial court as to what occurred before that court, particularly in the absence of a reporter. At page 636 of that case the court said that "when he (appellant) fails to convince the trial judge that his statement accurately reflects the proceedings in question, the action of the trial judge, who heard and tried the case, must be regarded as final."

Petition denied.

Nourse, P.J., and Goodell, J., concurred.

A petition for a rehearing was denied March 25, 1950, and appellant's petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied April 24, 1950.


Summaries of

Cross v. Tustin

Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Two
Feb 24, 1950
96 Cal.App.2d 207 (Cal. Ct. App. 1950)
Case details for

Cross v. Tustin

Case Details

Full title:NANCY CROSS, Appellant, v. JOHN TUSTIN et al., Respondents

Court:Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Two

Date published: Feb 24, 1950

Citations

96 Cal.App.2d 207 (Cal. Ct. App. 1950)
214 P.2d 565

Citing Cases

People v. Blanco

Without such a motion, we must presume the reporter's transcript is an accurate record of the testimony. (See…

In re Marriage of Nylander

Accordingly, we rely on the language in the family court’s order. (See Cross v. Tustin (1950) 96 Cal.App.2d…