Benedict v. Cozzens
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Sixth Judicial District. This was an action to recover damages from the defendants for a malicious prosecution, and the damages were laid at $10,000. At the October term, 1852, on the first trial, after the plaintiff had made some progress in the cause, he offered certain depositions in evidence, which on objection by the defendants, were rejected by the Court, and thereupon the Court, a ithe instance of the plaintiff, withdrew a juror.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Sixth Judicial District. This was an action to recover damages from the defendants for a malicious prosecution, and the damages were laid at $10,000. At the October term, 1852, on the first trial, after the plaintiff had made some progress in the cause, he offered certain depositions in evidence, which on objection by the defendants, were rejected by the Court, and thereupon the Court, a ithe instance of the plaintiff, withdrew a juror. On the 28th of December, 1852, on motion of plaintiff’s attorney, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court, that the papers in the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Heydeneeldt
Mr. Ch. J. Murray concurred.
1. The withdraAval of the juror was made to operate as a continuance by the Court. Such must, then, have been the design of it, and otherwise unexplained, it must bo presumed to have been done by consent, or without objection. Under any circumstances, it is no ground for reversal.
2. The substitution of papers is always within the discretion of the Court, and no notice of the motion to apply for it need be given, when the notice can be of no use. The *383principal paper substituted here, was the declaration, to which the defendant had the opportunity afterwards to plead…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Phelan v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Dorsey v. BarbaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Davis v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
- Curley v. Boston Herald-Traveler Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
- Brooks v. San Francisco & North Pacific Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.