Caruthers

Caruthers v. Hensley

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 966·90 Cal. 559·27 P. 411
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 25, 1891No. 14176California710 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

— This action, for the recovery of certain personal property, was tried by a jury, which rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for the possession of a portion of the property sued for, and assessed the damages for the detention thereof. Judgment “that the plaintiff have and recover from the defendants the said property, and the sum of $280 damages for the detention thereof, ” was thereupon entered by the court. From this judgment the defendants have appealed upon the *560 judgment roll alone, and ask a reversal upon the sole ground that the judgment is not in the alternative, as required by section 667 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

When an appeal to this court is to be determined upon the judgment roll alone, all intendments will be made in support of the judgment, and all proceedings necessary to its validity will be presumed to have been regularly taken. If the error relied on to destroy such presumption consists in matters dehors the record, such matters must be brought to this court by bill of exceptions or other appropriate method. If any matters could have been presented to the court below which would have authorized the entry of this judgment, it will be presumed…

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.