Miller & Lux Inc. v. Enter. Canal & Land Co.

Good Law
169 Cal. 415·1915 Cal. LEXIS 518·147 P. 567
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 19, 1915S.F. No. 6061.California8,031 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shaw, J.

The plaintiffs have appealed from certain parts of the judgment, and from-an order denying their motion for a new trial.

This action was begun in 1899 by the predecessors in interest of the present plaintiffs. Judgment was entered against the predecessor in interest of the plaintiff canal company, it appealed therefrom and on appeal the cause was on February 12, 1904, remanded by the supreme court with directions to the lower court to enter a certain judgment in favor of said plaintiff. (Miller & Lux v. Enterprise Canal Co., 142 Cal. 208 , [ 100 Am. St. Rep. 115 , 75 Pac. 770 ].) On March 28, 1904, the lower court entered judgment in accordance with the aforesaid mandate. Pending this appeal the defendants had instituted a motion for a new trial upon the ground, among others, that the evidence was insufficient to support the decision, and the lower court had on June 27, 1902, ordered a new trial accordingly. From this order an appeal had been taken and on January 3, 1905, the order granting the new trial was affirmed by this court. (Miller & Lux v. Enterprise Canal Co., 145 Cal. 652 , [ 79 Pac. 439 ].) Although the entry of the judgment in pursuance of the mandate of this court…

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.