From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Noonan v. Hood

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1874
49 Cal. 293 (Cal. 1874)

Opinion

         Appeal from the District Court, Seventh Judicial District, County of Sonoma.

         John Ledwidge died in the county of Sonoma on the 12th day of December, 1870. He had been in the employ of the defendant for several years as superintendent of a flouring mill. The plaintiff was Public Administrator, and, as such, administered on his estate. He alleged in his complaint an indebtedness of the defendant to the estate in the sum of $ 10,000; a balance due for goods sold, labor done, and money paid by the intestate for the defendant's use. The defendant, in his answer, demanded a bill of particulars of the plaintiff's claim, and set up a counter-claim for goods and money furnished, of the value of $ 8,000. He also denied the allegations of the complaint. The case was referred to a referee. Neither the complaint nor the answer spoke of gold coin, or any agreement about currency, or any kind of money, nor was the matter spoken of in the testimony. The referee found that the defendant was indebted to the deceased in the sum of $ 941 in U.S. gold coin, and a judgment for that sum, in said coin, was rendered. The defendant appealed.

         COUNSEL

          M. Johnson, for the Appellant.

         A. W. Middleton and Barclay Henley, for the Respondent.


         JUDGES: Wallace, C. J. Neither Mr. Justice Rhodes nor Mr. Justice Niles expressed an opinion.

         OPINION

          WALLACE, Judge

         The appeal is taken from the judgment.

         1. The point that the evidence is insufficient to justify the judgment is not well taken. The supposed bill of particulars upon which the argument of the appellant upon this point is founded is not contained in the record. The evidence given upon the part of the plaintiff tended to establish an indebtedness, in the first instance, from the defendant to the intestate of the plaintiff of eleven thousand seven hundred and seventy-five dollars. The amount of the offsets to be allowed in favor of the defendant involved a consideration of the credibility of the evidence offered, and the finding of the referee upon the question of fact involved will not be disturbed here.

         2. The objection that the referee, in making his report, did not state the facts found and conclusions of law separately, is not supported by the record.

         3. But there is nothing in the record to justify the judgment in gold coin, which the respondent obtained below. The judgment must be modified in that respect, but, inasmuch as no application was made to the Court below for the modification, no costs will be allowed to the appellant upon this appeal.

         Cause remanded without costs to the appellant, with directions to modify the judgment in the respect indicated.


Summaries of

Noonan v. Hood

Supreme Court of California
Oct 1, 1874
49 Cal. 293 (Cal. 1874)
Case details for

Noonan v. Hood

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE P. NOONAN, Administrator of the Estate of JOHN LEDWIDGE, Deceased…

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Oct 1, 1874

Citations

49 Cal. 293 (Cal. 1874)

Citing Cases

Hollman v. Wolf

However, this is not the main point of appellant's case, it is only incidental, since he strenuously insists…