Legal Opinion

Phelan v. Supervisors of San Francisco

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1858PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Motion to amend the judgment nunc pro tunc.

1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.

This case was decided at the October Term, 1856, and the judgment of the Court below simply reversed. We are now asked to amend the judgment, nunc pro tunc, by ordering the case to be remanded, with leave to the plaintiff to amend his complaint.

In the case of Stearns v. Aquirre and others, April Term, 1857, we held that a simple judgment of reversal was not necessarily a bar, but that “ after the reversal of an erroneous judgment the parties in the Court below have the same right that they originally had."

In this case'the defendants demurred to the complaint, which demurrer was overruled, and…

2Cited by10 opinions

  1. Heidt v. MinorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Harrison v. TraderSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1874
  3. People v. SkidmoreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
  4. Bodley v. FergusonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  5. Guisti v. GuistiNevada Supreme Court · 1921

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

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

Powered by the Exa API