Moore

Moore v. Hopkins

Good Law
17 Am. St. Rep. 248·1890 Cal. LEXIS 678·83 Cal. 270·23 P. 318
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 1, 1890No. 12334California1,087 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Foote, J.

—This action was instituted to recover damages from the defendant, based upon an alleged breach of a promise of marriage made by him to the plaintiff. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; from the judgment rendered thereon, and an order denying a new trial, the defendant has appealed.

Among other matters by way of defense, the defendant pleaded in abatement that another action was pending at the time this suit was brought, between the same parties, and for the same cause of action.

It is contended that the judgment of dismissal of a former action between the same parties, and for the same cause, was not admissible in evidence on the trial of the present cause, because, as is claimed, it is no answer to a plea in abatement of a pending action that a judgment of dismissal of the former action is entered after the trial of the second action has commenced, but before its conclusion. This contention, we think, is not well .founded. A dismissal of a prior action may be made and judgment entered at any time before the trial of the second action is completed. (Dyer v. Scalmanini, 69 Cal. 639 ; Hixon v. Schooley, 26 N. J. L. 461, 462; Averill v. Patterson, 10 N. Y. 501 .)

The…

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.