Heinlen

Heinlen v. Phillips

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 732·88 Cal. 557·26 P. 366
Supreme Court of CaliforniaApril 2, 1891No. 13925California809 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sharpstein, J.

This is an appeal from an order of the superior court, made on certiorari, annulling an order of a justice of the peace, by which a judgment previously rendered was set aside.

The cause appears to have been submitted in the superior court upon the return made to the wu'it. At any rate, there is nothing in the record before us to show that the return was controverted, and for the purpose of *558 the present appeal it must be taken to be true. The material facts shown by the petition and the return are as follows:—

John Heinlen, the appellant here, brought an action in the justice’s court of J. B. Runyon, of Mussel Slough township, Tulare County, against the respondent, P. 0. Phillips, to recover the sum of $150 for services rendered. An answer was put in, and a trial was had before another justice, who was called in by Justice Runyon to sit in his place. Both the parties were represented at such trial, and witnesses were sworn and examined. The case was submitted on December 16th, and on the 29th of the following January judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, for sixty dollars and costs. On the 20th of the following March, the plaintiff moved the court to set aside this…

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.