Bateman

Bateman v. Kellogg

Good Law
1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 207·59 Cal. App. 464·211 P. 46
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 24, 1922Civ. No. 3854.California7,533 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Finlayson, J.

This is an appeal by plaintiff from a judgment in favor of defendants in an action to quiet title to a parcel of land in Los Angeles County.

There were two trials of the case. Upon the first, which was without a jury, findings on all the material issues were made in favor of plaintiff, and the court gave judgment for plaintiff accordingly. Thereafter an order was made granting defendants’ motion for a new trial. The order, which was general in its terms, reopened the case for a new trial on all the issues. A retrial was had, at the conclusion of which the court rendered and entered its judgment in favor of defendants. It is from that judgment that plaintiff now appeals. One of the points urged by plaintiff upon this appeal is that the trial court erred in making its order granting defendants’ motion for a new trial after the first judgment in the case, and that, therefore, that order should he set aside and the first judgment reinstated and affirmed. That, however, is not a question which may be considered on this appeal. For the reasons set forth in Furlow Pressed Brick Co. v. Balboa, L. & W. Co., 186 Cal. 754 [ 200 Pac. 625 ], the order granting a new trial after the first…

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.