Loucks v. Edmondson

Citations

• 18 Cal. 203

Syllabus

<p>A notice of a motion to strike out a “ statement on motion for new trial ” must specify the grounds upon which the motion will be made, and wherein the statement is insufficient; and where the notice stated that the motion would be made for the reason that the statement was “ insufficient and not a lawful statement,” the motion was properly overruled.</p> <p>Valentine v. Stewart, (15 Cal. 396) that the Court below may allow an amendment to a statement on motion for new trial, by adding the grounds of the motion after the time for filing a statement has passed, affirmed.</p> <p>On appeal from an order granting or refusing a new trial, there is no necessity for preparing a statement on appeal—the statement on motion for new trial being sufficient.</p> <p>Where documents and depositions are read or referred to on the argument of a motion for new trial in the Court below, and are not embodied in the statement, it will be sufficient for the Judge to add, upon rendering his decision, a certificate of the matters thus read or referred to. This certificate will be sufficient identification of the documents and depositions used; and a copy of them, together with the statement and judgment roll, will constitute the only record necessary in the Supreme Court.</p> <p>An order by the Court below, granting a new trial, will not be disturbed where the statement on appeal consists of a mere outline of the evidence, without any rulings or instructions of the Court—the statement not purporting to give all the testimony, and that given not being so clearly in favor of the verdict as to justify any interference with the order.</p>