Opinion
04-01-1851
HOPPE v. ROBB.
Mr. Sandford, for Plaintiff. Mr. Tingley, for Defendant.
APPEAL from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District. Mr. Sandford, for Plaintiff. Mr. Tingley, for Defendant.
By the Court, BENNETT, J. The action was for money loaned. The question for determination at the trial was whether the money was advanced as a loan, or by way of subscription for the purpose of establishing a newspaper at San José. There was conflicting evidence upon this point, and the Judge of the District Court found that the money was advanced as a subscription.
We have frequently held that we would not review the verdict of a jury upon a question of fact, where there was conflicting or contradictory evidence, upon which the verdict was based. The same rule applies to the finding of a Judge, to whom a question of fact is submitted, and upon which he has passed. The judgment in this cause must, therefore, be affirmed.
Ordered accordingly.