TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Kelly v. Bradbury

THOMAS KELLY v. WILLIAM B. BRADBURY

Kelly v. Bradbury, 37 P. 872 (Cal. 1894)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
September 28, 1894
Docket
No. 15554
Judges
Fitzgerald, Haven, McFarland
Citations
37 P. 872104 Cal. 2371894 Cal. LEXIS 887
Headnotes
Appeal — Review op Evidence — Failure op Respondent to File Bribe. Where it appears from the record upon appeal that the verdict of the jury is assailed by specifications on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to support it, and there is no brief on file by the respondent, and the case is not orally argued in his brief, the judgment and order appealed from will be reversed.
Summary
Appeal from a judgment of tbe Superior Court of tbe City and County of San Francisco. Tbe facts are stated in tbe opinion of tbe court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Fitzgerald

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Fitzgerald, J.

It appears from tbe record that tbe verdict of tbe jury is assailed by the specifications, on tbe ground of tbe insufficiency of tbe evidence to support it.

There is no brief on file by respondent, nor was tbe case orally argued in his behalf; it therefore follows, on the authority of Richter v. Fresno etc. Co., 101 Cal. 582 , and Davis v. Hart, 103 Cal. 530 , that the judgment and order appealed from should be reversed.

So ordered McFarland, J., and De Haven, J., concurred;

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1896: 11900: 11916: 11918: 11932: 118962026peak 1896 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Lutz v. Merchants Nat. Bank177 P. 158 (Cal. 1918)
  2. Bullock v. Bullock155 P. 1009 (Cal. Ct. App. 1916)
  3. Duisenberg-Wichman & Co. v. Johnson7 P.2d 1081 (Cal. Ct. App. 1932)
  4. Mountain Tunnel Gravel Mining Co. v. Bryan43 P. 410 (Cal. 1896)
  5. Lawrence v. Johnson63 P. 176 (Cal. 1900)

Most recent

  1. Duisenberg-Wichman & Co. v. Johnson7 P.2d 1081 (Cal. Ct. App. 1932)
  2. Lutz v. Merchants Nat. Bank177 P. 158 (Cal. 1918)
  3. Bullock v. Bullock155 P. 1009 (Cal. Ct. App. 1916)
  4. Lawrence v. Johnson63 P. 176 (Cal. 1900)
  5. Mountain Tunnel Gravel Mining Co. v. Bryan43 P. 410 (Cal. 1896)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Richter v. Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co., 36 P. 96 (Cal. 1894) 10
Davis v. Hart, 37 P. 486 (Cal. 1894) 9

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list