Wilson

Wilson v. County of Los Angeles

Caution
1971 Cal. App. LEXIS 1073·21 Cal. App. 3d 308·98 Cal. Rptr. 525
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 17, 1971Civ. 37378California2,844 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lillie, J.

Plaintiffs tried their false imprisonment action to a jury, and at the close of their case defendants moved to dismiss; the motion was granted and plaintiffs appeal from judgments entered on the dismissal.

Although section 631.8, Code of Civil Procedure, expressly declares that its provisions are limited to a “trial by the court,” and provides for findings, both groups of defendants erroneously moved for judgment thereunder. Thereafter the court made no findings. Subsequently such error was sought to be corrected by the submission of formal judgments, each captioned “Judgment of Nonsuit” and reciting that the motions granted were for “a judgment of nonsuit.” A motion for judgment under section 631.8, of course, is not a motion for nonsuit. (Charles C. Chapman Building Co. v. California Mart, 2 Cal.App.3d 846, 858, fn. 2 [ 82 Cal.Rptr. 830 ].) Too, the scope of appellate review is different. Unlike its consideration of a motion for nonsuit, the trial court is authorized by section 631.8 to weigh the evidence, and since its findings are accordingly entitled to the same respect on appeal as any other findings, the judgment will not be reversed if supported by substantial…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.