Goldson Co. v. Thomas Haverty Co.

Good Law
122 Cal. App. 41·9 P.2d 508
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 21, 1932Docket Nos. 7114, 7112, 7113.California1,002 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

The three above-entitled actions were originally filed in the municipal court of Los Angeles and were consolidated for trial. Judgment was rendered in each case for the plaintiff against the defendant Thomas Haverty Company, and in each case judgment was entered that plaintiff take nothing as against the defendant Joseph Zukin, Inc. Thereupon, defendant Thomas Haverty Company filed in said court a motion for a new trial, which motion was denied, and the Haverty Company appealed to the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. On the seventh day of August, 1928, an order was made and entered in said superior court in each case reversing the judgment of the municipal court against the defendant Thomas Haverty Company and ordering a new trial. It is from the latter judgments that this appeal is taken.

The judgments of the municipal court were reversed by the superior court upon several stated grounds. We shall assume, as counsel in their briefs have assumed, that the only matters necessary for consideration on this appeal relate (a) to the sufficiency, or insufficiency, of the evidence to sustain the findings of the municipal court, and (b) to the alleged error of the trial court in…

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.