Careaga v. Fernald
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County. Mandamus to compel the defendant to settle a statement on motion for a new trial. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, J.
An action entitled Harris v. Careaga was referred by the Superior Court of Santa Barbara county to the defendant herein, “ to try all the issues of law and fact in said cause, and to report findings and a judgment thereon.” The case was *352regularly tried before the referee, who subsequently, and on the 9th of January, 1882, reported to the court his findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a judgment; but by direction of the court, they were not filed until the 8th day of September, 1882. Meanwhile, however, that is to say, on the 13th of February, 1882, the defendant, against whom the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Merced Mining Co. v. FremontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- People v. CraneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- People ex rel. Lee Lin Tai v. HewillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by7 opinions
- Bayless v. LimberCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- Leach v. PierceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Hicks v. MastenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Harris v. CareagaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Rich v. McClureCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.