From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hook v. Hall

Supreme Court of California
Nov 19, 1885
68 Cal. 22 (Cal. 1885)


         Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of the county of Monterey granting a new trial.


         W. S. Dodge, and H. V. Morehouse, for Appellant.

          A. S. Kittredge, Julius Lee, A. L. Hart, and S. Solon Holl, for Respondent.

         JUDGES: In Bank. McKinstry, J. Thornton, J., Ross, J., and McKee, J., concurred.


          McKINSTRY, Judge

          [8 P. 597] The notice of intention to move for a new trial constitutes no part of the judgment roll or of the record to be furnished to this court on appeal from an order granting or denying a new trial. (Code Civ. Proc., secs. 661, 952.)

         In support of the action of the court below, it will be presumed that the motion for new trial was made on the ground (amongst others) that the verdict was not justified by the evidence; and as there was a substantial conflict in the evidence, the order must be affirmed here in accordance with the settled rule.

In the statement of the case on motion for new trial, immediately preceding the judge's certificate of the settlement of the statement, is the recital:

         " The plaintiff in filing and submitting amendments to defendant's statement on motion for new trial herein specially reserves the right, and does not waive any rights that she may have to object and except to the hearing of the said defendant's motion for new trial on the ground that the notice of said motion was not filed with the clerk of said Superior Court within the statutory time prescribed by section 659 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the state of California."

         This portion of the statement cannot be treated as in the nature of a bill of exceptions. The facts are not set out, and as the notice of intention constitutes no part of the record, we are not informed but that the motion was filed within the time prescribed by the code.

         Order affirmed.

Summaries of

Hook v. Hall

Supreme Court of California
Nov 19, 1885
68 Cal. 22 (Cal. 1885)
Case details for

Hook v. Hall

Case Details

Full title:BARBARA M. HOOK, Appellant, v. JAMES A. HALL, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Nov 19, 1885


68 Cal. 22 (Cal. 1885)
8 P. 596

Citing Cases

Oakland Gas Light Co. v. Dameron

          McKINSTRY, Judge           [8 P. 596] It is urged by appellant that the court below did not…

Loveland v. Gardner

It must be presumed that the jury obeyed the instructions, and there is no showing of excessive damages to…