City of San Francisco v. Pacific Bank

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 759·89 Cal. 23·26 P. 615
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 4, 1891No. 14146California537 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

— The judgment appealed from must be affirmed. The appeal is directly from the judgment, and is here upon the judgment roll alone. There is a bill of exceptions in the record purporting to contain all the evidence upon which the case was heard in the court below,but it does not contain any specification of errors wherein it is alleged that the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision of the court. Section 648 of the Code of Civil Procedure declares: “ When the exception is to the verdict or decision upon the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to justify it, the objection must specify the particulars in which such evidence is alleged to be insufficient. The objection must be stated with so much of the evidence or other matter as is necessary to explain it, and no more.”

The bill of exceptions in the present case does not “ specify any particulars ” in which the “ evidence is alleged to be insufficient” to justify the decision of the court, but at the end thereof, after setting forth the evidence, is found the following statement: —

It has been repeatedly held by this court that such general exception is not a compliance with the foregoing section, and that 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.