From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Falkner v. Hendy

Supreme Court of California
May 4, 1895
107 Cal. 49 (Cal. 1895)

Opinion


107 Cal. 49 40 P. 21 J. W. FALKNER, E. T. STEEN (Substituted), Respondent, v. JOSHUA HENDY et al., Appellants No. 15644 Supreme Court of California May 4, 1895

         107 Cal. 49 at 54. Rehearing Denied.

         Original Opinion of April 4, 1895, Reported at 107 Cal. 49.

         OPINION

         THE COURT          A petition for a modification of the judgment having been filed, the following opinion was rendered thereon on the 4th of May, 1895:

         The Court.

         Respondent asks us to so modify the judgment herein as to give express direction that the cause be remanded for a new trial.

         Such modification is unnecessary, since the effect of the unqualified reversal is to remand the cause for a new trial. (Stearns v. Aguirre , 7 Cal. 443; Argenti v. San Francisco , 30 Cal. 459; Ryan v. Tomlinson , 39 Cal. 639.)


Summaries of

Falkner v. Hendy

Supreme Court of California
May 4, 1895
107 Cal. 49 (Cal. 1895)
Case details for

Falkner v. Hendy

Case Details

Full title:J. W. FALKNER, E. T. STEEN (Substituted), Respondent, v. JOSHUA HENDY et…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: May 4, 1895

Citations

107 Cal. 49 (Cal. 1895)
40 P. 21

Citing Cases

Wood v. Brown

That this is the rule is shown by California Supreme Court decisions, not cited in Lewis, wherein the…

Frazier v. Murphy

The court erred in proceeding with the case against the executors of the deceased defendant, without the…