Weber

Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co. v. Weber

Good Law
41 F.2d 514·1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 2829
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 26, 1930No. 5855California521 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wilbur, J.

This is a companion case to Sacramento, etc., v. Melin (C. C. A.) filed December 17, 1929, 36 F.(2d) 907 . Appellees purchased the land July 8, 1927, and the statute of limitations is not involved. The court did not err in denying defendant’s application for an order selecting another judge to try the ease. Sacramento, etc., v. Tatham (C. C. A.) 40 F.(2d) 894 , this day filed.

Appellant assigns as error the instructions of the court with reference to- the witness Mr. Sehei. . The exception is as follows: “We except to the court’s comment on the testimony of Mr. Sehei with reference to his investigation in regard to fruit raising.”

The court had called the attention of the jury to the testimony of this witness, and it stated, among other things: “Mr. Sehei does not say much about the orcharding aspect of the case, as I remember the testimony; do not think he testified very much about any efforts to ascertain — that he testified to anything whether the lands were well adapted, entirely adapted to orcharding. What he testified to mainly was the poultry aspect in reference to the value of the land.”

The court was in error in this statement concerning Mr. Sehei, who testified at…

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.