Contracts · MBE-tested
ALEXANDER H. DOLLARHIDE, Appellant, v. ISAAC F. THORNE, Respondent
1 Cal. Unrep. 2·Supreme Court of California·1855·CA
I concur: Bryan, J.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
ALEXANDER H. DOLLARHIDE, Appellant, v. ISAAC F. THORNE, Respondent.
No. 653;
September 22, 1855.
New Trial. — The Exercise of Discretion by the Trial Court in granting a new trial will not be too closely scrutinized, particularly when the granting has been conditional upon payment of costs by the party favored.
APPEAL from Napa County.
Hastings & Curry for appellant; Brown, Pratt & Tracey for respondent.
[MAJORITY — 'HEYDENFELDT, 'J.]
'HEYDENFELDT, 'J.
— The peculiarity of the relief sought by the bill of complaint shows that the delay caused by opening the judgment and giving a new trial cannot operate to the injury of the plaintiff, if it is finally determined that he is entitled to the relief. Adding to this the consideration that the payment of the costs by the defendant is made the condition of setting aside the judgment, we are not, in such cases, disposed to scrutinize too closely the exercise of discretion by the district court.
Order affirmed.
I concur: Bryan, J.