Opinion

Baum v. Reay

96 Cal. 462 · California Supreme Court · Nov 22, 1892

Full text

JULIUS BAUM v. JOSEPH W. REAY

Opinions in this case

Majority
Dissent — Haven

The Court. — This cause was heard and decided in Department One. We are satisfied with the views therein expressed and the conclusion reached; but in support of the ruling of the court below in excluding the inventory offered in evidence by the defendant, we cite the follow [465] ing cases: Leighton v. Wike, 4 Serg. & R. 204; Aelclen’s Executor v. Hickman, 63 Ala. 494. The rule in New York has been changed (Guy v. Mead, 22 N. Y. 466); but our code seems to indorse the rule followed in Pennsylvania and Alabama, and which formerly prevailed in New York. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 2047.) The judgment and order are affirmed.

California Court of Appeal · Aug 16, 1928

Goodrich v. Mortimer

California Court of Appeal · Dec 3, 1919

Marcone v. Dowell

California Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1918

Earl v. San Francisco Bridge Co.

California Court of Appeal · Sep 4, 1916

Strauss v. Phenix Insurance

Colorado Court of Appeals · Apr 15, 1897

Parentheticals

No parentheticals returned.