Fallon v. Dougherty
FALLON v. DOUGHERTY
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Stephen J. Field (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 — Field
Field, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Terry, C. J., and Baldwin, J., concurring.
This case must be reversed for want of sufficient preliminary proof of the inability of the plaintiff to produce the original deed from Sutter to Hammersly, through whom she deraigns title to the premises in controversy, to authorize the admission of the record copy. The evidence introduced only shows a search by the agent of the plaintiff and inquiry of Hammersly. It does not appear that the plaintiff herself has not the possession or control of the original. Her affidavit, in the absence of other evidence, should have been offered on the point. Laws of 1857, chap. 254, sec. 2; Macy v. Goodwin, 6 Cal. 581; Hensley v. Tarpey, 7 Cal. 288 ; Bagley v. Eaton, 10 Cal. 147.
Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.
Cites, in this corpus
- In Re Hatch Bar Misc. 1481 · 1937-11-22
- Hensley v. Tarpey · 1857-07-01