Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Clifford v. Ruocco

California Supreme Court

Decided July 16, 1952No. L. A. 22178Published

1ConcurrenceCarter, J.

I concur in the judgment of reversal but cannot agree with the reasoning of the majority on which it bases its conclusion that the action should be retried on all the issues. It is obvious that the majority has not analyzed the decisions which have given consideration to this problem.

From a study of the cases it is apparent that the function of the appellate court in determining whether or not a new trial should have been granted, and whether some or all of the issues should be retried, varies with what has happened in the trial court. This must be true if we are to follow *331the traditional…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Brooks v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Bauman v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  3. Ballard v. Pacific Greyhound LinesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Cox v. Tyrone Power Enterprises Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1942
  5. Pearl v. PearlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918

27 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