Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Kohlstedt v. Hauseur

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 14, 1937No. Civ. 11588Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

McCOMB, J., Concurring and Dissenting.

I concur in the affirmance of the order setting aside the order granting a new trial, but I dissent from the order reversing the order of the trial court in setting aside its previous order amending its judgment. In my opinion the error in the original judgment which the trial court attempted to amend was a “judicial error” and not a “clerical error” and therefore, as stated in the majority opinion, not subject to correction by a subsequent amendment by the trial court. (14 Cal. Jur. 999, sec. 74.)

The foregoing conclusion is supported by Schattinger v.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Schattinger v. SchattingerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1926

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API