Ritchie, Osgood & Co. v. Davis
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, San Francisco County. This was an action brought upon a store account. Defendant denied generally, and pleaded specially the statute of limitations. The cause was submitted to a referee to report a judgment. The referee reported a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs for $240, the amount of the last item charged in the account.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, San Francisco County. This was an action brought upon a store account. Defendant denied generally, and pleaded specially the statute of limitations. The cause was submitted to a referee to report a judgment. The referee reported a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs for $240, the amount of the last item charged in the account. The plaintiffs moved to have the report set aside, and have the case recommitted to the referee, which motion the Court granted. At the same time, the defendant asked leave to amend that part of his answer…
1Opinion of the CourtMurray, C. J.
Heydenfeldt, J., concurred.
The Court below erred in setting aside the first report of the referee. The plea of the defendant would have been bad upon demurrer, but as no objection was taken at the time, and the case submitted to the referee, this was not sufficient reason for setting aside the report. If it was, we are at a loss to understand why the Court refused to permit the defendant to amend his plea, when it was evident from the report, that the plaintiffs could not recover if the statute was properly pleaded.
This was not only a gross abuse of discretion, but an absolute denial of law…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Wilkins v. StidgerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- Carr v. CaldwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Segale v. PagniNevada Supreme Court · 1926