Legal Opinion

Miller v. Logan

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 9, 1916No. Civ. No. 1525PublishedCited by 5 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.

The appeal is from an order granting the motion for a new trial. Appellant states that the appeal is taken “with full knowledge of the great discretion lodged in a trial judge in the matter of granting a new trial when the evidence placed before the jury is conflicting. But we desire to protest strongly against what seems to us to be the arbitrary undoing of all the labor and expense which necessarily goes into a trial by jury, in a case where no injustice was done, in which a fair and proper verdict was rendered by a jury selected and approved by both sides, in which the judge granting the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Cahill v. E. B. & A. L. Stone Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Wilson v. California Central RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Morgan v. J. W. Robinson Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Empire Investment Co. v. MortCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Tweedale v. BarnettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ham v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
  2. Woods v. WalkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  3. People v. WoodardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  4. Cohen v. CohenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  5. Ham v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API