From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nelson v. Floyd

Supreme Court of California
Jun 13, 1884
2 Cal. Unrep. 325 (Cal. 1884)

Opinion

          Appeal from the superior court of Lake county.

         COUNSEL

          Cape & Boyd and T. A. O’Brien, for appellant.

          John S. Bugbee, for respondent.


         OPINION

         BY THE COURT.

         Appeals from an order granting a new trial. The decision and judgment, which the court set aside, were founded upon substantially conflicting evidence, bearing upon the main questions, as issue between the parties, as to the existence and extent of the subordinate claims and liens against the building in controversy; and as the court set the judgment aside and granted a new trial upon the ground that the evidence was insufficient to justify them, this court, in the absence of a manifest abuse of discretion, will not disturb the order. Guttierrez v. Brinkerhoff, 9 P. C. L. J. 734; Blum v. Sunol, 11 P. C. L. J. 275; Pierce v. Schaden, 55 Cal. 406; Bronner v. Wetzlar, Id. 419.

          Order affirmed.


Summaries of

Nelson v. Floyd

Supreme Court of California
Jun 13, 1884
2 Cal. Unrep. 325 (Cal. 1884)
Case details for

Nelson v. Floyd

Case Details

Full title:NELSON v. FLOYD.

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jun 13, 1884

Citations

2 Cal. Unrep. 325 (Cal. 1884)
2 Cal. Unrep. 325

Citing Cases

Lyon v. Petty

Nor did they at the commencement of the action by the administrator, because, at that time, the time of the…

L. v. Greater Johnstown School District

Ex. 5 p. 11; Vol. 4 p. 105. At this point the District viewed the passing of the note as a "Level 4"…