Glascock

Glascock v. Watters

Good Law
136 Cal. App. 713·1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 972·29 P.2d 434
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 16, 1934Docket No. 9224.California853 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Spence, J.

Plaintiff sued to recover damages for personal injuries. Upon a trial by jury plaintiff had judgment against defendants for the sum of $1500. A motion for new trial was made in the trial court and from the order granting said motion, plaintiff appeals.

The only point argued by appellant is that the trial court erred in granting a new trial on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence. The motion was made upon several grounds and the order was not based solely upon the ground mentioned, but also “upon all issues”. Respondents argue that the order was properly made upon the ground of error in the instructions as well as the ground of insuffi cieney of the evidence. It is therefore apparent that appellant’s brief is inadequate to show error in the trial court’s ruling. (Weaver v. Shell Oil Co. of California, 129 Cal. App. 232 [ 18 Pac. (2d) 736 ].)

We have nevertheless considered the ground of insufficiency of the evidence and are satisfied that the trial court’s ruling was proper upon that ground alone. The rules which govern the trial courts in passing upon motions for new trials on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence and the rules which govern the appellate courts on…

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.