Opinion
Appeal from the District Court of the Fifteenth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco.
The Court filed findings of fact, and the plaintiff's attorney claimed that the last figure of 1870, as it was originally filed, was a 1, but that it had been surreptitiously changed to 0. This was a material matter, as the Statute of Limitations was involved.
The plaintiff moved on affidavit to have the figure 1 restored. Defendant filed no counter affidavit. The Court denied the motion, and plaintiff appealed.
COUNSEL
W. E. Darby and Parker & Roche, for Appellant.
McAllister & Bergin, for Respondent.
OPINION By the Court:
The motion of the plaintiff, which was denied by the Court below, was based upon the allegation that the findings as originally signed and filed had been subsequently and surreptitiously altered in a material respect. The truth or falsity of this allegation was matter so peculiarly within the knowledge of the Court itself, that its determination of the fact, in the one way or the other, would rarely, if ever, be disturbed here. There is nothing in the record before us which would enable us to say that the determination of the fact was incorrect in this instance.
Order affirmed.