Wayland

Wayland v. Latham

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 159·89 Cal. App. 55·264 P. 766
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 7, 1928Docket No. 5986.California5,253 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burroughs, J.

This is an action of unlawful detainer after default in payment of rent and three days’ notice to pay rent or quit. The cause was tried by a jury and a verdict returned in favor of the defendant. Before the entry of judgment thereon the court, notwithstanding the verdict, on motion of plaintiff, rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff declaring a forfeiture of the lease, a restitution of the premises, $2,650 rent due and an attorney fee in the sum of $500, together with his costs of suit.

It is the contention of the appellant that the court erred in setting aside the verdict of the jury and substituting its own judgment therefor in that it is claimed the verdict finds substantial support in the evidence.

Before reviewing the evidence we will consider and analyze the law governing the subject of the power of the court to enter a judgment contrary to the verdict of the jury. Section 629 of the Code of Civil Procedure, added to said code in 1923 (Stats. 1923, p. 750), so far as pertinent to this decision, provides: “"When a motion for a directed verdict, which should have been granted,- has been denied and a verdict rendered against the moving party, the court, at any time…

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.