Lukes v. Logan
California Supreme Court
Application for a mandamus to compel the respondent, a Superior Judge, to settle a bill of exceptions. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court.
The return shows that a jury was duly impaneled and sworn to try the case of Lukes v. Bernheim et al., and that after the plaintiff had introduced evidence and rested, the defendants moved for a nonsuit, which was granted, and the jury was discharged by the court, which made an order that the fees of the jury be paid by the plaintiff. The plaintiff refused to comply with that order, and the court thereupon ordered that no further proceedings be allowed in the action until said fees were paid. The plaintiff prepared, and presented to the respondent for settlement, a bill of…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Stonesifer v. KilburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Burns v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. King Land & Improvement Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
- Majors v. Superior Court of Alameda Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
- Richardson v. BohneyIdaho Supreme Court · 1910
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.