Preston v. Eureka Art. Stone Co.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order denying defendant’s motion for new trial, in the Nineteenth District Court, City and County of San Francisco. Wheeler, J. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Department No. 2, Sharpstein, J.:
This is an appeal from an order denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial. The motion was based upon a bill of exceptions and affidavits ; from which it appears, that in July, 1876, the case was transferred from its proper place on the calendar to the foot of it, on account of the absence of the plaintiffs’ attorney, who was in the Atlantic States during part of that and the preceding month. On his return in the latter part of July, by an ex parte motion he had the case advanced on the calendar, so that it was reached for trial on the 31st of July. Prior…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Ward v. ClayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Sucesión Lluveras v. SepúlvedaSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1914
- Nelson v. ReinhartNevada Supreme Court · 1917
- Succession of Lluveras v. SepúlvedaSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1914