Grow

Petition for a mandamus to be directed to the defendant commanding Mm to settle a statement on motion for new trial in Grow v. His Creditors.

It appears that Wetzel, one of the creditors, filed his written opposition to the petitioner’s discharge on the ground of fraud. The issue was tried by a jury, who found fraud as alleged. Grow moved for a new trial for errors of law and on the ground that the verdict was not justified by the evidence. The judge refused to settle a statement on new trial, duly filed and submitted.

Proceedings in insolvency are no longer to be regarded as “special oases” in the sense in which that phrase was applied to them prior to 1863, for by the amendments to the constitution the jurisdiction became organic. To that extent the jurisdiction of the county courts in insolvency rests upon the same foundation as the general jurisdiction of the district courts, and that of the supreme court, both original and appellate.

We held in Dorsey v. Barry, 24 Cal. 449 , relied upon in argument, that the jurisdiction- in contested election cases was special — a. statute creation. That the proceedings were intended to be summary, and that the subject matter made it…