Morcom

Morcom v. Baiersky

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 480·1911 Cal. App. LEXIS 277·117 P. 560
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 22, 1911Civ. No. 969.California1,194 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

James, J.

Action to quiet title to and for possession of a certain lot of land in the city of Los Angeles. Judgment^, was in favor of defendants. The appeal is from the judgment and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, presented on a bill of exceptions. Insufficiency of the evidence to justify the decision and the ruling of the trial judge in admitting in evidence a certain map are urged as grounds for reversal.

The appeal from the judgment was taken more than sixty days after entry thereof; this appeal, therefore, was taken too late to authorize this court to consider the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the decision. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 939, subd. 1.) Nor can the evidence be reviewed to determine the question as to whether or not it is sufficient to sustain the judgment, on the appeal from the order denying the motion for a new trial. It is nowhere, shown in the record upon what grounds that motion was made. Por aught that appears, the ground of insufficiency of the evidence may not have been urged in the court below at the hearing of the motion. The transcript shows the order of the court denying the motion for a new trial, wherein it is stated that…

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.