From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Campe v. Meierdiercks

Supreme Court of California
Dec 24, 1890
87 Cal. 290 (Cal. 1890)

Opinion

         Department Two

         Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco.

         The action was brought to recover the sum of $ 3,630 for money loaned to the defendant. The defendant denied the loan, and pleaded that all but fifteen hundred dollars of the money was given to the defendant freely and without solicitation, and that the remaining sum of fifteen hundred dollars was a present from the plaintiff to defendant's daughter, and that by the plaintiff's direction, he gave his note for that sum to his daughter.

         COUNSEL:

         W. B. Tyler, for Appellant.

          Henry H. Reid, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Thornton, J. McFarland, J., and Sharpstein, J., concurred.

         OPINION

          THORNTON, Judge

         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-established rule of this court, the decision of the court below will not be disturbed.

         Judgment and order affirmed.


Summaries of

Campe v. Meierdiercks

Supreme Court of California
Dec 24, 1890
87 Cal. 290 (Cal. 1890)
Case details for

Campe v. Meierdiercks

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM CAMPE, Respondent, v. CHRISTIAN MEIERDIERCKS, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Dec 24, 1890

Citations

87 Cal. 290 (Cal. 1890)
25 P. 419

Citing Cases

Riverside Water Co. v. Sargent

When the evidence is conflicting, the findings of the court below will not be disturbed. (Duff v. Duff , 87…

People v. Douglass

If a person is found in or on a passenger-car on a train for carrying passengers, such a fact will justify…