Rice v. Cunningham
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Twelfth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. This action was brought to recover possession of a fifty vara lot on the northeast corner of Bush and Montgomery streets, in the City of San Francisco.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court, Twelfth Judicial District, City and County of San Francisco. This action was brought to recover possession of a fifty vara lot on the northeast corner of Bush and Montgomery streets, in the City of San Francisco. The plaintiff claimed that the intestate, John Kittleman, owned the lot under an Alcalde’s grant issued to him by George Hyde, Alcalde of San Francisco in 1846. He asserted that the original grant delivered to Kittleman had been lost, and to prove its issuance, introduced in evidence the book of original grants of Alcaldes in San Francisco. On pages…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Sanderson, J.
We are first asked to grant a new trial in this case upon the broad ground that the verdict is contrary to the evidence. Counsel admit that the evidence is conflicting, and acknowledge the force of the uniform rule of this Court not to disturb the verdict in such cases; but they claim that this is an exceptional case, and therefore ought not to be subjected to the operation of that rule.
New trial because the verdict is against evidence.
The foundation upon which this claim is based is the fact that the motion for a new trial was not passed upon by the same Judge who…
2Cited by7 opinions
- McClung Ex Rel. McClung v. CullisonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1905
- Donner v. PalmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Rulofson v. BillingsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Pralus v. Pac. Gold & Silver Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1868
- Dunaway v. AndersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.