Martin

De Molera v. Martin

Good Law
120 Cal. 544·1898 Cal. LEXIS 805·52 P. 825
Supreme Court of CaliforniaApril 8, 1898S. F. No. 644California2,416 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

Judgment was rendered herein m favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant for the possession of a certain tract of land. The defendant moved for a new trial upon the ground that the evidence was insufficient to justify the decision of the court. The motion was denied, and he has appealed from this order, and also from the judgment, presenting the appeal upon a statement of the case. The respondent makes a preliminary objection to hearing the appeal from the order, upon the ground that the appellant has not specified in the statement the particulars in which the evidence is alleged to be insufficient, and therefore the statement must be disregarded.

Section 659 of the Code of Civil Procedure requires the party intending to move for a new trial to give to the adverse party a notice of his intention, “designating the grounds upon which the motion will be made,” and upon what papers it will be made. The “grounds” of the motion here referred to are the “causes” designated in section 657 for which a new trial may be granted, one of which is “insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict or other decision.” Section 659 further states: “When the notice of the motion…

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.