Frankel v. Deidesheimer
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sierra County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
— This cause has been long pending in this court, and has been reargued twice. One of the justices is disqualified from participating in its decision, and of the six other justices three are of opinion that the judgment should be affirmed, and three are of opinion that the judgment should be reversed. Repeated consultations have ended in the same disagreement, and there is no probability of any change in the opinions of those now constituting the court, or of any immediate change in the personnel of the court. Under these circumstances we think that the judgment should be affirmed,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Luco v. De ToroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
3Cited by7 opinions
- State ex rel. Hampton v. McClungSupreme Court of Florida · 1904
- Matter of ZanyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Santa Rosa City Railroad v. Central Street Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Smith v. Ferries & C. H. Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Adams v. SaundersSupreme Court of Florida · 1939
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.