Sweetland v. Shattuck (1884) · DecisionDepot

Sweetland v. Shattuck

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

California Supreme Court Oct 21, 1884 No. No. 7,064Published

Before: Ross

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that an objection regarding the lack of a written agreement under the Statute of Frauds cannot be raised for the first time on appeal if it was not raised in the trial court.

Issues

Whether an objection to the lack of a written agreement can be raised for the first time on appeal.
Whether a verdict based on conflicting evidence without exceptions to jury instructions should be upheld.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Such objection cannot be made here for the first time.”

“The evidence upon which the verdict was based was substantially conflicting, and there were no exceptions taken in the court below to the instructions of the court.”

Synopsis

Evidence—Appeal—Practice.—Where oral evidence of an agreement required to be in writing is received at the trial without objection, the question of its admissibility will not be considered on appeal.

Ross, J. Assuming that the agreement upon which the plaintiff relied for a recovery was required to be evidenced by writing, the plaintiff was permitted in the court below to give proof of the agreement without objection that it was not in writing. Such objection cannot be made here for the first time. (Reed on the Statute of Frauds, vol. 2d, §§ 540, 541, and authorities there cited.)

The evidence upon which the verdict was based was substantially conflicting, and there were no exceptions taken in the court below to the instructions of the court.

Judgment and order affirmed.

McKinstry, J., and McKee, J., concurred.

Sweetland v. Shattuck

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief