Gately v. Irvine
Synopsis
Parol Evidence as to Records.—Parol evidence is admissible to prove that the record made by the Superintendent of Streets in San Francisco of the completion of a contract for the improvement of a street was made after the assessment issued, although it is dated before the assessment issued. Such evidence does not contradict the record.
Contradicting Record.—Proof that a record was not made on the day it is dated, does not contradict it.
Filing and Settling Statement.—A statement on motion for a new trial, if filed before it is settled, need not be filed afterwards.
By the Court: We think the court below was mistaken in supposing that the oral evidence rejected contradicted the record. . It only went to prove when the record was made.
The statement was filed and settled, which is the equivalent of “ settled and filed.”
Judgment and order reversed and cause remanded for a new trial.
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)