Maldonado

Maldonado v. Linza

Good Law
1962 Cal. App. LEXIS 1950·207 Cal. App. 2d 651·24 Cal. Rptr. 608
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 13, 1962Civ. No. 25863California1,198 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Files, J.

This is an action by a real estate broker against his client to recover a commission. Plaintiff is appealing from a judgment against him after a court trial. All of appellant’s arguments are based upon the claimed insufficiency of the evidence to support the findings of the trial court. Appellant is here under a misconception of the function of an appellate court. He opens his argument with this statement (without citation of authority): “If, upon a review of all the evidence, the reviewing court is left with a definite conviction that, although there is evidence to support each of the Findings, a mistake has been made, the reviewing court must reverse.”

Perhaps no statement of law has appeared more frequently in the reports than the rule which governs this appeal: “When a finding of fact is attacked on the ground that there is not any substantial evidence to sustain it, the power of an appellate court begins and ends with the determination as to whether there is any substantial evidence, contradicted or uncontradicted, which will support the finding of fact. [Citation.]

“ When two or more inferences can reasonably be deduced from the facts, a reviewing court is without power to…

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.