Nicholl v. Littlefield (1882) · DecisionDepot

Nicholl v. Littlefield

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

California Supreme Court Mar 21, 1882 No. No. 7,127Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the judgment because the record lacked a bill of exceptions or statement of evidence necessary to review the lower court's decision to grant a nonsuit.

Issues

Whether the appellate court can review a lower court's decision to grant a nonsuit in the absence of a bill of exceptions or statement of evidence.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“There is no statement or bill of exceptions setting forth the evidence oh which the Court determined to grant the motion for a nonsuit. Such being the case, the ruling of the Court below can not be reviewed here.”

Synopsis

Appeal prom a Judgment of Nonsuit.—Record on Appeal.—Appeal from a judgment of non-suit. There was no statement or bill of exceptions setting forth the evidence on which the Court granted the motion. Held: The ruling of the Conrt can not be reviewed.

The Court: The only question to which our attention is called in this case relates to the decision of the Court below in granting a nonsuit. That the cause took this course on the trial appears from a recital in the judgment entry found in the transcript. There is no statement or bill of exceptions setting forth the evidence oh which the Court determined to grant the motion for a nonsuit. Such being the case, the ruling of the Court below can not be reviewed here. (Levy v. Getleson, 27 Cal. 685; Ringgold v..Haven, 1 id. 108.)

Judgment affirmed.

Nicholl v. Littlefield

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief