Fahey v. Madden
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtFinch, P. J.
Plaintiff appeals from the order of the trial court granting defendant Madden’s motion for a new trial. [1] The motion was made on all the statutory grounds. It appears from the briefs that the only ground argued in support of the motion was the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict. The order granting a new trial does not specify the ground upon which it was granted and, therefore, under the provisions of section 657 of the Code of Civil Procedure, it must be presumed that it was not based upon the ground of insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict.
[2] At the close…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Davis v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- White Ex Rel. White v. HinesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- Maupin v. SolomonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Randolph v. HuntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Brown v. Chevrolet Motor Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Engstrom v. Auburn Automobile Sales Corp.California Supreme Court · 1938
- Kruse v. White BrothersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Crouch v. Gilmore Oil Co., Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1936
- Pozzobon v. O'DONNELLCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Ransford v. AinsworthCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.