From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fee v. Starr

Supreme Court of California
Apr 1, 1859
13 Cal. 170 (Cal. 1859)

Opinion

         Appeal from the Fifth District.

         COUNSEL:

         L. Quint and J. W. Coffroth, for Appellant, cited Woods v. Forbes , 5 Cal. 62; McLeran v. Shortzer, Id. 70.

          D. W. Perley, for Respondent, cited 4 Cal. 384-112; Doyle v. Sewall , 12 Id.; 7 Id. 398, 290, 38; 8 Id. 510; 9 Id. 247; 5 Id. 151, 319.


         JUDGES: Terry, C. J. delivered the opinion of the Court. Baldwin, J. concurring.

         OPINION

          TERRY, Judge

         There is in the record no properly authenticated statement or bill of exceptions, setting out the evidence.

         The statement in the record is neither signed by the Judge, nor agreed to by the parties, nor does it appear that a copy was ever served on Respondent or his Attorney.          The Clerk's certificate that the statement is the same which was used on the argument of the motion for a new trial, is entitled to no weight, as the Clerk is not authorized by law to verify a statement in that form.

         The judgment roll disclosing no irregularities, the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

Fee v. Starr

Supreme Court of California
Apr 1, 1859
13 Cal. 170 (Cal. 1859)
Case details for

Fee v. Starr

Case Details

Full title:FEE v. STARR AND GRIMSHAW

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Apr 1, 1859

Citations

13 Cal. 170 (Cal. 1859)

Citing Cases

Leete v. Sutherland

The sole duty of the clerk is to furnish the appellant with certified copies of papers on file in his office,…