Tonini v. Cevasco
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order denying a new trial. John Hunt, Judge. * The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFarland, J.
This is an action to recover damages for an alleged libel by the defendants in a newspaper owned by them, to the injury of plaintiff. The jury rendered a verdict for plaintiff in the sum of one thou. *269sand dollars, which, on the motion for a new trial, was reduced by the court to five hundred dollars. Defendants appeal from the judgment and from the order denying a new trial.
Appellants’ first contention is that the verdict is not sustained by the evidence; but this contention cannot be maintained. The .main issues of fact were whether or not the respondent was discharged as an employee by the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Edwards v. San Jose Printing & Publishing SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Bettner v. HoltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Lick v. OwenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Vactor v. WalkupCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
- Fitch v. De YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
3Cited by36 opinions
- MacLeod v. Tribune Publishing Co.California Supreme Court · 1959
- Washer v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Earl v. Times-Mirror Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
- Stevens v. SnowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Bates v. CampbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.