Lacey v. McConnell
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
ROTH, J., pro tem.
This appeal is prosecuted on the judgment roll alone. The record before us shows that the filed their complaint setting forth four causes of action. The motion of defendant Bott for nonsuit was granted as to the first, second and third causes of action. On the fourth cause of action judgment went against her, as well as against the other defendants, who do not appeal. The first question presented is whether the findings made by the trial court are so inconsistent that the judgment against appellant must be set aside. The inconsistency to which our attention has been directed…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Haight v. HaightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Bickerdike v. StateCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Corey v. StruveCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Wilson v. MatteiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Goodwin v. SnyderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Estrin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939