Legal Opinion

Baroni v. Rosenberg

California Supreme Court

Decided February 3, 1930No. Docket No. S.F. 13779PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PRESTON, J.—

The order granting a new trial, here appealed from by defendant B. Rosenberg, is affirmed. The sole question is whether the trial court abused its discretion in making said order.

Plaintiff predicated his motion for new trial upon practically all of the statutory grounds (sec. 657, Code Civ. Proc.), but urged as the main specifications of error alleged prejudicial misconduct on the part of counsel for said defendant, hereinafter detailed, and that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The insufficiency of the evidence cannot be urged in support of the order, however,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Keena v. United Railroads of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Gee v. Fong PoyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. De Cruz v. ReidCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Magee v. Wyeth Laboratories, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1963
  3. Smith v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Amore v. Di RestaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. Fleming v. FlickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

16 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