First National Bank of Escondido v. Williams

Good Law
1921 Cal. App. LEXIS 521·54 Cal. App. 537·202 P. 164
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 14, 1921Civ. No. 3392.California716 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Craig, J.

Judgment was rendered against the defendants from which and an order denying a motion for a new trial they appeal. The points to be considered as alleged by appellants are, first, the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the findings of the court that Mina W. Williams signed the note as principal and co-maker and for a valuable consideration; and, second, the right to have findings presented and served upon the opposing counsel five days before the same are signed by the judge.

Concerning the second proposition, we dismiss appellants’ contention without passing upon its merits because it nowhere appears in the record on appeal that the findings were not served upon defendants’ counsel, as provided by law. The only information which we have to that effect is an assertion contained in appellants’ brief. [1] However, it may be said that the provision of section 634 of the Code of Civil Procedure here cited has been held to be directory only. (Amundson v. Shafer, 36 Cal. App. 398 [ 172 Pac. 173 ].)

[2] The other ground urged must be determined upon the rule that the findings of the trial court will not be disturbed where there is a substantial conflict in the evidence. We are…

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.