Campe v. Meierdiercks
Before: Thornton
Synopsis
Appeal — Review of Conflicting Evidence.—Where the evidence is conflicting. the decision of the court below on a question of fact will not be ' disturbed.
Thornton, J. In this case the whole question is as to an issue of fact, which was determined by the court below in favor of plaintiff.
Whether the money sued for was a gift or not, part of it to the defendant, and a part of it to his daughter, depends on evidence in the cause. The evidence was on all material points conflicting. The court below decided that the money was not a gift, and rendered judgment for plaintiff.
It is no use to review the evidence, but as it was conflicting on the issue above mentioned, according to the long^establislied rule of this court, the decision of the court below will not be disturbed.
Judgment and order affirmed.
McFarland, J., and Sharpstein, J., concurred.
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)