Harris v. San Francisco Sugar Refining Co.

Citations

• 41 Cal. 393

Syllabus

<p>Practice in Law and Equity.—The mode of reviewing the action of the Court upon an issue of fact is the same, whether the case, is at law or in equity.</p> <p>Be view or Question or Pact.—In order to review a question of fact, there must be a motion for a new trial.</p> <p>Review ob Action ob Rebbree. — If a referee tries a question of fact raised by the pleadings, the Court cannot review his action on such issues, unless a motion is made for a new trial.</p> <p>Idem.—If a referee tries a collateral question, not made an issue of fact by the pleadings, his action thereon may be reviewed by the Court, by exceptions to the report, without a motion for a new trial, and his report is not binding on the Court until adopted by it.</p> <p>Question Discussed.—Is not the manner of bringing the testimony before the Court in case of such exceptions to be regulated by rules to be adopted by the Court?</p> <p>Report ob Reberee on a Collateral Question. — When a collateral question, not made an issue by the pleadings, is referred to a referee, his finding of the facts does not take the place of a special verdict, as provided in section one hundred and eighty-seven of the code, and is not binding on the Court until adopted by it.</p> <p>Report ob Reberee.—When a referee reports his decision upon th^ whole case, his report stands as the decision of the Court; when he reports the facts only, his report is a special verdict.</p> <p>Notice ob Motion bor New Trial.—If, in an action to obtain the specific performance of a contract, and to have an account taken, the principles upon which the account is to be taken are not raised, as issues in the pleadings, but an issue is made only on the plaintiff’s right to have the account taken, and the Court enters an interlocutory judgment, that the plaintiff is entitled to a specific performance, and to have an account taken, and orders a reference to take the account on principles fixed in the order, a notice of motion for a new trial need not