Caney v. Silverthorne (1858) · DecisionDepot

Caney v. Silverthorne

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1858Published

Before: Burnett, Terry

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. A defendant who fails to provide notice of an intention to move for a new trial or file a statement within the statutory time limit forfeits the right to a new trial.

Issues

Whether the defendant preserved the right to move for a new trial by failing to comply with statutory filing deadlines.
Whether the court may consider a statement for a new trial that was not filed within the time limited by statute.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the statement for new trial not having been filed in time, is not properly a part of the record.”

“judgment is affirmed, with costs.”

Synopsis

A party failing to give notice, in time, of his intention to move for a new trial, or to file his statement in time, waives his right to move for a new trial.

Burnett, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—TERRy, C. J., concurring. The defendant, having failed to give notice of his intention to move for a new trial, or to file his statement within the time [68]limited by the statute, lost his right to move for a new trial. (Practice Act, § 195.)

There is no statement on appeal; the statement for new trial not having been filed in time, is not properly a part of the record. We can only look at the judgment-roll; which, being regular on its face, judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Caney v. Silverthorne

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief