Hampton v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
1DissentSchauer, J.
I dissent.
Construed as the majority now interpret and apply our order, I think that we erred against a basic policy of law in Young v. Hampton (1951), 36 Cal.2d 799, 806 [228 P.2d 1], We erred not in reversing the judgment there appealed from but in directing the trial court to enter a different judgment as specified, and thereby, now rule the majority, foreclosing the parties from litigating new issues, issues which had never been tendered or joined, let alone adjudicated.
I would not so construe our order. It can be given full effect and still permit the joining and determination of the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. Lee LookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Young v. HamptonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- People v. HardissonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- People v. LaumanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- People v. HudsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.