Bate v. Miller
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, from an order refusing a new trial, and from an order refusing to amend the findings or make additional findings. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. «
1Per curiam
The judgment and orders must be affirmed. The findings are sufficient to sustain the judgment and the statement on motion for new trial contains no sufficient specification of particulars wherein the findings are unsustained by the evidence. There is no affidavit in support of the alleged *234grounds of surprise and newly discovered evidence, which by statute is made essential to the granting of a motion for ■ new trial on either of those grounds. And with respect to the plaintiff’s motion to “amend and make additional findings,” it is sufficient to say that this motion was made long after the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Thompson v. Connecticut Mutual Life InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1894
- Lewetzow v. SapiroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- County of Los Angeles v. LankershimCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Heinlen v. HeildronCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887