Flannigan

Flannigan v. Towle

Good Law
8 Cal. App. 229·96 P. 507
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 28, 1908Civ. No. 459.California891 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

At the time of the submission of this cause, in accordance with rule 14 ’ of the supreme and appellate courts, there was a suggestion by appellants of diminution of the record. According to the certificate of the clerk below the printed record contains an incomplete transcript of the bill of exceptions as actually settled by the trial judge. The defect consists in the omission of the objections made by appellants to the introduction in evidence of the deeds upon which defendant Towle relies for his title and the exceptions taken to the orders of the court overruling said objections.

As the record should speak the truth, the motion of appellants to supply said omission is granted and the said certificate filed in this court will be considered.

The result is, that we have a record containing no challenge of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the findings, and the only specification of error is that “the court erred in admitting in evidence defendants’ exhibits A, B, C, D, E and F.”

Plaintiffs admitted at the trial that they could show no title to the land described in any of these deeds except that contained in exhibit B. Hence they are not aggrieved parties so far as the…

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.