Hayes

Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Hayes

Good Law
36 F.2d 947·1929 U.S. App. LEXIS 2306
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 17, 1929No. 5707California475 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wilbur, J.

This is a companion case to Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands, etc., v. Melin (No. 5671) 36 F. (2d) 907.

The court, among other instructions, gave the following instruction to the jury: “Mr. Morley testified to his efforts on nearby land in Arcade. He tells you about other orchards, Fletcher, Wamser, Hams, and Holmes, all nearby, that they had heavy crops. In his opinion it would grow successfully. These men that he mentioned, he says, had commercial orchards. It would have been more enlightening to you and of more value if the defendant called these men and let them tell you about their dealings with this land of theirs. They could have given you figures. It would not be the mere statement of somebody else that they look good, or they produced a heavy crop, or the like. The defendant has not called them. You may take Mr. Morley’s testimony in respect to it for as much as you think it worth, and no more. There is a rule of law that if a party produces weaker evidence when stronger evidence is available to him, the jury may take that into consideration in determining how much weight you will give to the weaker evidence. The men who own the orchards and grow the orchards would be…

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.