Snodgrass v. Snodgrass

CASHIN, J.

Appeals from the judgments entered for defendant in two actions brought by appellant to recover for services alleged to have been rendered to defendant at his request.

The cause of action in each complaint was stated in the form of two common counts, one for the value of services rendered and the other upon an account stated, it being alleged in each count that the claim was unpaid.

The actions, numbered 150686 and 150687 respectively, as shown by the register of actions in the trial court, were by stipulation of the parties tried together, and the appeals are presented on the same transcript.

The allegations of the complaint, which were denied, were found to be untrue, and appellant contends that the findings on the issues in the first case are not sustained by the evidence.

While the testimony in that ease was conflicting on the questions whether services were rendered and an account stated as alleged, the record discloses sufficient evidence to support the findings of the court on these decisive

[362]

issues, and its conclusions cannot be disturbed

(Del Monte Ranch Dairy Co.

v.

Bernardo,

174 Cal. 757 [164 Pac. 628];

City of San Diego

v.

Hall,

180 Cal. 165 [179 Pac. 889]).

The notice of intention to move for a new trial in the second action designated as grounds thereof those provided by section 657 of the Code of Civil Procedure with the exception of the second subdivision thereof, and stated that the motion would be made upon affidavits and upon the minutes of the court. Appellant contends that his affidavits supporting the motion on the grounds of surprise and conduct on the part of his adversary by which it was alleged that he was prevented from having a fair trial, not having been met by counter-affidavits, the denial of the motion was erroneous.