Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

50 Cal. 105

Wingate v. Ferris

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1875

California Supreme Court · decided 1875-07-01

The plaintiff averred in his complaint that, on the 12th day of January, 1872, he owned the steamer Express, worth $10,000, and that it had been seized by the marshal under a process from the District Court of the United States, issued by virtue of a decree in equity for about $300, and was about to be sold to satisfy the decree, and that, at his request, the defendant agreed, as his agent, to attend the sale and bid in the property, and pay for it and hold it in trust for…

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1875-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 1924

10 state decisions

50187518801890190019101920decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

By the Court, McKinstry, J.:

¶1The complaint contains a statement of a cause of action such as would entitle the plaintiff to equitable relief.

¶2*108We entertain no doubt that the District Court had power to set aside the general verdict and the judgment entered thereon. As the cause was one of equity cognizance, the facts should have been found by the court, or specially by a jury, under an order of the court. The order vacating the verdict and judgment was proper, but we can see no reason why the testimony should be retaken.

¶3That portion of the order appealed from which directs a new trial, reversed; that portion thereof which orders that the verdict and judgment be vacated and set aside, is affirmed. And the District Court is directed, upon the testimony already taken (and upon such other and further testimony, if any, as may be taken, in case the said District Court shall, in its discretion, open the cause for further testimony), to proceed to determine the issues of fact joined herein and to adjudge and decree final judgment in this action.

¶4Mr. Justice Crockett did not express an opinion.

/50/cal/105 · .json · Public domain