Connolly v. Ashworth
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Fitzgerald,
This case was tried by the court without a jury, and its decision given in writing and signed by the judge, but not filed with the clerk until after the term of office of the judge had expired.
Upon the back of the proposed decision and in the judge’s handwriting appears the following indorsement: —
“ To be left with the clerk and not filed till further notice or amendment heard by the court from def’t (meaning plaintiff).
“T. H. Eearden, Judge.”
The judge thereupon instructed the clerk to deliver the proposed decision so indorsed to plaintiff’s attorney for the purpose of proposing…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Mace v. O'ReilleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Warring v. FreearCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Hastings v. HastingsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Comstock Quicksilver Mining Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Polhemus v. CarpenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Dawson v. Wright, Mayor, Etc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1955
- State Ex Rel. Harp v. Vanderburgh Circuit CourtIndiana Supreme Court · 1949
- Martello v. Superior Court of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Wainwright v. P. H. & F. M. Roots Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1912
- Hayward Union High School District v. MadridCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.