People v. Mauritzen
Citations
- 84 Cal. 37
- 24 P. 112
- 1890 Cal. LEXIS 756
Syllabus
<p>Criminal Law—Obtaining Property under False Pretenses—Pretense not Relied upon —Sale upon Credit. —When a defendant is charged with the crime of obtaining horses under false and fraudulent pretenses, the offense is not matte out if it appears that the horses were sold to the defendant on credit, and that the vendor took a note from defendant for the price, and relied on the sale of the horses by the defendant for his pay, although defendant may have falsely represented that he had money in bank equal to the price of the horses.</p> <p>Id.—Improper Instruction — Promissory Note—Pro^f of Contents—■ Secondary Evidence. — When the giving of a note and its contents are proved by witnesses without objection, the note is as much in evidence as if it had been proved by the production of the written instrument itself; and it is prejudicial error in such case to instruct the jury that the note is not in evidence before them.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- vacating award of permanent injunction entered after interlocutory hearing due to lack of notice that permanent relief would be considered
- vacating award of permanent injunction entered after interlocutory hearing due to lack of notice that permanent relief would be considered
- refusing to micromanage trial court’s conduct of its proceedings by declining to find that specific findings are required as to enumerated statutory requirements when ruling upon motions to dismiss for forum non conveniens
- refusing to micromanage trial court’s conduct of its proceedings by declining to find that specific findings are required as to enumerated statutory requirements when ruling upon motions to dismiss for forum non conveniens
- “Considering the number, variety, and nature of the statutory factors that necessarily must inform the discretion of the trial court, meaningful appellate review is possible only if the record reflects in some way the thinking that led the trial court to exercise its discretion as it did”
- in considering dismissal of action under forum nonconveniens statute, best practice is for trial court to make explicit findings to enable appellate review
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: McFarland, Paterson, Thornton
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.