Hamill v. Littner
HAMILL v. LITTNER
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Issac S. Belcher (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 — Belcher
BELCHER, C. C.
This case was submitted to the court below upon an agreed statement of the facts, and findings were, therefore, not necessary. Besides, the court, in its decision of the case, recited the facts substantially as they were agreed to, and these facts, and the conclusions of law thereon, were separately stated. The exact point involved in this case was decided in Hay v. Hill, 65 Cal. 383, 4 Pac. 378. We are satisfied that that decision was right. Upon the authority of that case, the judgment here should be affirmed.
We concur: Searls, C.; Foote, C.
By the COURT.—For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion the judgment is affirmed.
Cites, in this corpus
- Hay v. Hill No. 9,456 · 1884-07-18