White

White v. Rosenstein

Good Law
134 Cal. App. 576·1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 186·25 P.2d 884
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 10, 1933Docket No. 8031.California1,068 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Stephens, J.

In this suit it was sought to recover from a notary public or the notary’s bondsman certain damages resulting from a transaction regarding real estate and an encumbrance thereon to secure the loan, in which the notary took an acknowledgment without knowing that the acknowledger was the person she claimed to be. The case was tried by the court without a jury and judgment was awarded plaintiffs. A motion was subsequently made by defendants under section 663 of the Code of Civil Procedure “for an order vacating and setting aside said judgment in favor of plaintiffs and against defendants and directing another and different judgment to be entered on the said findings of fact in favor of defendants and against plaintiffs”. Such motion was granted and an order entitled “New "and Different Conclusions of Law” was signed by the court holding that the specific facts set out in the findings of fact show that the proximate cause of the damages suffered by plaintiffs was the plaintiffs’ own contributory negligence. The original judgment was set aside, and from the judgment subsequently entered pursuant to the new conclusions of law plaintiffs appeal upon the judgment-roll.

We have here a…

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.