Snodgrass v. Ricketts
California Supreme Court
Appeae from the Sixth District.
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
Terry, C. J. concurring.
This case, when it came on for trial, was, after the plaintiff’s statement of his case, summarily disposed of by the Court, by its intimation that, conceding the plaintiff’s statement to be true—that is, that he could establish the facts stated in the bill— he was not entitled to recover. We do not consider this a demurrer to the evidence. It was rather deciding the case on the demurrer, or as on demurrer to the complaint, or as on a motion for a nonsuit. We mention this for the purpose of saying that if we remand the case on the ground of error in the judgment below,…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Hayes v. LivingstonMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
- Toole v. TooleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
- Meadows v. Hampton Live Stock Commission Co.California Court of Appeal · 1942
- Kimball v. Baker Land & Title Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1913
- Keegan v. Kaufman Bros.California Court of Appeal · 1945
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.