Minturn v. Burr
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the County Court of the City and County of San Francisco. This case was before the Supreme Court on a previous appeal at the July term, 1860, reported in 16 Cal. 107. The purport of the evidence on the first trial is there stated in the opinion of the Court, and at the new trial it was of the same character, and showed clearly that the negro locksmith, who opened the door, did so under the direction of defendants Burr and Whitney.
1Opinion of the CourtField, C. J.
The Civil Practice Act provides that pleadings in Justices’ Courts shall be in writing, and be verified by the oath of the parties, their • *49agents or attorneys, when the action is for the foreclosure of any mortgage, or the enforcement of any hen on personal properly, or for a forcible or unlawful entry upon, or a forcible or unlawful detention of lands, tenements or other possessions, or to recover possession of a mining claim; and that in other cases the pleadings may be oral or in writing. (Prac. Act, sec. 571.) But unlike its provisions with reference to pleadings in actions in Courts of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Minturn v. BurrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Evill v. ConwellIndiana Supreme Court · 1828
3Cited by3 opinions
- McEvoy v. IgoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Wyoming National Bank v. DaytonWyoming Supreme Court · 1875
- Ewing v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868