Blum

Blum v. McHugh

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 1239·92 Cal. 497·28 P. 592
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 29, 1891No. 13952California666 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McFarland, J.

This is an appeal by defendant from an order of the court below setting aside a verdict and *498 judgment in favor of defendant and granting a new trial. The new trial appears to have been granted upon the ground of insufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict; and in such a case we do not disturb the ruling, unless where there has been a clear abuse of discretion.

The action was to recover certain hay on a farm that had been leased by Stewart, the owner of the farm,, to Chubbuck & Son. The defendant, McHugh, who was’ a constable, claimed to have taken the hay by virtue of a writ of attachment against said Chubbuck at the suit of one McHarry. Stewart had assigned the lease and all rights which he had under it to the plaintiff, Blum. The lease provided that “ the title to and right of possession of all crops ” on the farm “ shall be in ” the lessor, Stewart, until the rent shall be paid. The whole amount of rent which Chubbuck was to pay was $950; and it seems from the evidence — stated in the opinion of the court when granting the new trial — that when this action was commenced the rent had all been paid except about $100, and that Blum had in his possession, in his…

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.