Bennett

Bennett v. Potter

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 183·1911 Cal. App. LEXIS 156·116 P. 681
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 6, 1911Civ. No. 899.California1,507 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

James, J.

The complaint in this action contained three counts. At the trial plaintiff elected to proceed upon the third count, which stated a cause of action for breach of contract, consisting in the refusal of defendant to accept and pay for a certain automobile purchased by the latter from the plaintiff. Judgment was in favor of plaintiff and against defendant for the sum of $1,775 and interest. Defendant appealed from the judgment and from an order denying her motion for a new trial. The appeal from the judgment was taken too late. Notice of appeal was filed more than seven months after judgment was entered; hence that appeal should be dismissed. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 939; Robinson v. Eberhart, 148 Cal. 496 , [ 83 Pac. 452 ].)

The appeal from the order, denying defendant’s motion for a new trial presents for review the matter as to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the findings, and the further question as to whether or not the court erred in the admission of certain testimony which was objected to by defendant. The complaint must be treated as sufficiently stating a cause of action, and the findings cannot be examined for the purpose of determining whether or not they support…

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.