From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Redman v. Gulnac

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1855
5 Cal. 148 (Cal. 1855)

Opinion

         Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, Santa Clara County.

         The opinion of the Court contains the facts.

         COUNSEL:

         A. C. Campbell & A. J. Yates, for Appellant.

          Wallace & Ryland, for Respondents.

         No briefs on file.


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

         OPINION

          MURRAY, Judge

         It was error, after the jury had retired, to allow them to come into Court and instruct them, in the absence of the parties or their counsel.

         Such instructions will be considered important if the contrary is not shown, from the very fact that the jury have asked for them. The certificate of the Judge of the Court below is a sufficient authentication of the statement. An appellant cannot be defeated of his rights by any such proceeding. If the respondent did not think proper to file amendments, or the Judge to correct the statement, the certificate of that fact by the Judge is all that is necessary.

         Judgment reversed, with costs, and new trial granted.


Summaries of

Redman v. Gulnac

Supreme Court of California
Jan 1, 1855
5 Cal. 148 (Cal. 1855)
Case details for

Redman v. Gulnac

Case Details

Full title:Joshua W. Redman&John Yontz, Respondents, v. Maria Y. Gulnac, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jan 1, 1855

Citations

5 Cal. 148 (Cal. 1855)

Citing Cases

Addy v. Stewart

After the jury have retired for deliberation, it is reversible error for the Court to allow them to return…

Tice v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.

Any other method of communication is held to go to the substance of the right of trial by jury and because of…