Legal Opinion

Swift v. Occidental Mining & Petroleum Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided November 28, 1903No. L.A. No. 1037PublishedCited by 56 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

BEATTY, C.J.—

The appeal in this ease is from an order overruling a motion for a new trial. After affirmance of the order in Department, a rehearing was granted, because of the error there committed in holding that the specifications in the statement were insufficient to entitle the appellants to a review of the findings of fact for the purpose of determining whether they were sustained by the evidence.

The first part of the Department opinion, however, containing a statement of the case and disposing of certain contentions of the appellants, to the effect that the cross-complaint of defendant…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Brison v. BrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Dawson v. SchlossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Wheeler v. BoltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Kyle v. CraigCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Stuart v. LordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903

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

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Peters v. PetersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Mentone Irrigation Co. v. Redlands Elec. Light & Power Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Renfer v. SkaggsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  4. California Portland Cement Co. v. Wentworth Hotel Co.California Court of Appeal · 1911
  5. Cameron v. Ah QuongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917

51 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