Cross v. Zane
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, City and County óf San Eran cisco. The plaintiff recovered a judgment, in September, 1869, against the defendant, for ten thousand one hundred and twenty-four dollars and thirty-two cents, and procured an execution on the same, under which the Sheriff of San Francisco sold several lots, as the property of the defendant, and the plaintiff purchased them for over seven thousand dollars, and received the Sheriff’s…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, City and County óf San Eran cisco. The plaintiff recovered a judgment, in September, 1869, against the defendant, for ten thousand one hundred and twenty-four dollars and thirty-two cents, and procured an execution on the same, under which the Sheriff of San Francisco sold several lots, as the property of the defendant, and the plaintiff purchased them for over seven thousand dollars, and received the Sheriff’s deed. The plaintiff after-wards petitioned the Court to revive the judgment to the extent of the amount bid, on the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
The order, which is the subject of the appeal in this case, was not made upon affidavits alone, and it therefore does not *90fall within the exception in section three hundred and forty-three of the Practice Act. Under the provisions of the Practice Act and the rule upon the subject announced in JELaggin v. Clark, 28 Cal. 162, and uniformly adhered to since, we cannot disturb the order upon the record before us, and it is therefore affirmed.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Haggin v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865