SHULTZ v. ROURKE (1934)

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 1, California.

SHULTZ v. O'ROURKE et al.

Civ. 8002.

Decided: October 30, 1934

John J. McMahon, of Los Angeles, for appellant. Holland & Holland, of Los Angeles, for respondents.

Plaintiff appeals from the judgment entered herein in favor of the defendants. The evidence and pleadings are in a very involved state, as are the briefs of the parties filed herein. The question raised by appellant is one that is answered by the general rule that where there is any evidence to support a finding, an appellate court cannot set up its judgment in lieu of that of the trial court. This is so as to the objections made by appellant to each of the findings to which he takes exception.

No appeal lies from an order denying motion for a new trial; therefore the appeal from that order is dismissed.

The judgment is affirmed.

YORK, Justice.

I concur: CONREY, P. J. I concur in the judgment: HOUSER, J.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network