Boyd v. Burrel

Citations

• 60 Cal. 318
• 1882 Cal. LEXIS 458

Syllabus

<p>Stipulation—New Trial—Bill op Exceptions—Practice.—After a motion for a new trial had, by consent of parties, been passed upon by 0., the District Judge, who tried the case—upon a bill of exceptions amended and settled but not engrossed,—a dispute arose between counsel as to the engrossment. Thereupon—June 17, 1880—it was stipulated “that the bill of exceptions, as engrossed by plaintiff, together with the bilí as prepared by plaintiffs and the amendments proposed by defendants, and the order of Judge 0., settling said bill, be all sent to Judge C. for him to decide if said bill is properly engrossed, and if not properly engrossed to correct the same, and sign said bill as of December 1, 1879, when so corrected.” Subsequently, Judge 0., after striking out certain portions of the bill as engrossed by the plaintiffs, certified the same as correct, and afterwards the defendants moved the Judge of the Superior Court to strike out portions of the bill. Held, that, in view of the stipulation, it was not error to deny the motion.</p>