Mitchel

Mitchel v. Gray

Good Law
1908 Cal. App. LEXIS 174·8 Cal. App. 423·97 P. 160
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 23, 1908Civ. No. 454.California2,021 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hart, J.

The plaintiffs brought this suit for the purpose of rescinding a certain contract by which the defendant bought from the appellant, Skillen, a mine known as the “Lanky Bob Quartz Mine,” situated in Siskiyou county.

The court, as advisory to it upon the questions of fact, called to its aid a jury, to which, upon the conclusion of the adduction of evidence and the arguments, it' submitted some forty special questions of fact, covering all the material points brought out by the evidence addressed to the principal issue tendered by the pleadings. To some of these questions the jury made affirmative answers and to the others negative. The court adopted a number of the answers and rejected the others, and made findings of its own in favor of the defendant. A decree was accordingly entered, and this appeal is by the plaintiffs from the judgment and the order denying plaintiffs a new trial.

1. Objection is urged by respondent against a consideration of the appeal from the order, because, as claimed, it does not appear from the record that an appeal from the order has been taken. The notice of appeal from the order, as it appears in the transcript, stated that “the plaintiffs above named…

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.