Spiegelman

Spiegelman v. Eastman

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 471·95 Cal. App. 205·272 P. 761
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 30, 1928Docket No. 3645.California4,792 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Plummer, J.

This cause is before the court upon an appeal by the defendant from the judgment entered therein in favor of the plaintiff, and also upon an appeal by the plaintiff from an order granting a new trial after judgment. If the order granting a new trial was properly made, the judgment from which the defendant has appealed falls of its own weight. On the contrary, if the order granting a new trial should be reversed, it follows as a matter of course that the judgment should be affirmed.

This cause was heard before the Honorable T. A. Norton, sitting with a jury, and verdict rendered in favor of the plaintiff. Thereafter, a motion for new trial was heard and determined by Honorable Hartley Shaw, and granted on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence, and on the further ground of newly discovered evidence, and though, as held in the cases of Jones v. Senders, 103 Cal. 678 [ 37 Pac. 649 ], and Garton v. Stearn, 121 Cal. 347 [ 53 Pac. 904 ], the same presumptions attach to the order made by Judge Shaw that would have attached to the order granting a new trial if made by Judge Norton, yet, if any one of the causes of action relied upon by the plaintiff is established without any…

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.