Gruben v. Leebrick & Fisher, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtSchauer, J.
This case was tried before the court without a jury, judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, and defendant moved for a new trial on the grounds that “1. That the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision and that the decision is against the law;
“2. Errors in law occurring at the trial.”
Upon such motion the trial court ordered “that a new trial be and hereby is granted on the defendant’s motion” without further specification of grounds therefor. Examination of the record before us discloses that there was a substantial conflict in the evidence before the trial court and therefore such…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- San Joaquin & Kings River Canal & Irrigation Co. v. StevinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Kent v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Newman v. Overland Pacific Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1901
- Springer v. Pacific Fruit ExchangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Bureau of Welfare, California Teachers' Ass'n v. DrapeauCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Cox v. Tyrone Power Enterprises Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1942
- Ellis v. KlaffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Bayley v. SouzaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
- Dickey v. Raisin Proration Zone No. 1California Supreme Court · 1944
- Bayley v. SouzaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.