Yount v. Arakalian Bros. Co.
G. W. YOUNT, Respondent, v. ARAKALIAN BROS. COMPANY (A Corporation), Appellant
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of Imperial County
- Trial judge
- Franklin J. Cole
- Outcome
- other — The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Dan V.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- James (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 — James
JAMES, J.
Respondent brought this action to recover for services performed under a written contract alleged to have been executed by defendant. He had judgment in the lower court, from which this appeal has been prosecuted by the defendant. In addition to the usual papers constituting the judgment-roll, there is printed what purports to be a statement of the case presenting the evidence heard at the trial. It does not appear that this statement was ever settled by the trial judge; nor is there any stipulation attached thereto by reason of which this court would be authorized to take notice of the contents of that statement. It would seem from a note printed on the concluding page of the transcript that the motion for settlement of the statement was by the trial court denied. There is, therefore, nothing presented from which a review of the evidence can be made. Examining the judgment-roll, we find no error which willl warrant a reversal being ordered. The findings of the court seem to support the judgment and to have been within the issues made by the pleadings.
The judgment is, therefore, affirmed.
Conrey, P. J., and Shaw, J., concurred.
Cited by
- Ducray v. Ducray Civ. 865 · 1967-12-26
- Moore Grocery Co. v. Los Angeles Nut House Docket No. 5083. · 1928-04-11