¶1In this case a jury was waived in the court below, and the same was tried on the twenty-fifth of March, 1885, by the court sitting without a jury. Judgment was rendered on the twenty-sixth of March, 1885, in favor of defendants, and against the plaintiff. The only error alleged is that the court never filed any findings of the facts upon which the judgment was rendered. It is a well-settled rule upon an appeal taken that error is not presumed, but must be affirmatively shown. All presumptions are in favor of the proceedings of the lower court, and of the validity of its judgment: Mulcahy v. Glazier, 51 Cal., 626. If there were no findings, and they were not waived, it should be shown affirmatively by a bill of exceptions, or some other appropriate method; otherwise the presumption is that the findings were waived: Id.,Smith v. Lawrence, 53 Cal. 34. As the record in this case does not show affirmatively that findings were not waived, th.e judgment of the court below must be affirmed.
4 Utah 405
Haynes v. Roberts
Decided June 15, 1886
Utah Supreme Court · decided 1886-06-15
The opinion states the facts. There were no findings of the facts put in issue by the pleadings in this case. The court never made or filed any findings of the facts upon which judgment was rendered. Section 505 of the practice act requires, in trials of issues of fact by the court, that findings of fact and conclusions of law must be separately stated, and judgment upon the decision must be entered accordingly.
Relies on Smith v. Lawrence
Decided 1886-06-15