Scott v. Boyle
M. P. Scott, and v. Thomas F. Boyle, as Auditor of the City and County of San Francisco, State of California
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order refusing a new trial
- Trial judge
- J. M. Seawell
- Outcome
- other — The facts are similar to those stated in the opinion in McEvers v. Boyle, ante, p. 476.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- The Court. — (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
The parties in the above-entitled cause having stipulated that the appeals from the judgment and order rendered in said cause in favor of the respondent, M. P. Scott, presents questions identical with those presented in the case of No. 1431, McEvers v. Boyle, ante, p. 476, [144 P. 308], decided by this court on September 21, 1914; that the facts in both cases are in all respects the same; and that all briefs and arguments filed and made on the appeal from the judgment in favor of the petitioner and respondent, J. W. McEvers (being case No. 1431), may be considered as made and filed in the appeal from the judgment and order in favor of said respondent M. P. Scott, Now, therefore, it is hereby ordered upon the authority of the case of McEvers v. Boyle (Civ. No. 1431), and for the reasons stated in the opinion filed therein, that the order and judgment appealed from in the above-entitled cause be, and the same are hereby affirmed. *Page 807
Cites, in this corpus
- McEvers v. Boyle Civ. No. 1431. · 1914-09-21