Gates v. Buckingham

California Supreme Court Jul 15, 1854Published

Before: Heydeneeldt, Murray

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the lower court's order re-taxing costs because the record lacked a bill of exceptions or statement, requiring the appellate court to presume the lower court acted correctly.

Issues

Whether an order re-taxing costs can be reviewed without a bill of exceptions or statement of evidence.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The judgment must, therefore, be affirmed, on the presumption that the Court below decided correctly upon all the evidence before it.”

Synopsis

Appeal from the Fourth Judicial District.

Mr. Ch. J. Murray delivered the opinion of the Court.

Mr. J. Heydeneeldt concurred. [287]This appeal is presented from an order of the Court below re-taxing costs.

The record contains various notices and affidavits, which are not, however, embodied in a bill of exceptions or statement, so that we are uninformed upon what the Court acted. The judgment must, therefore, be affirmed, on the presumption that the Court below decided correctly upon all the evidence before it.

More from California Supreme Court

People v. Wende (1979)
People v. Watson (1956)
People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
People v. Kelly (2006)
Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
People v. Lewis (2021)
In Re Estrada (1965)
Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
People v. Marsden (1970)

Related research