Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

J. A. RICHTER, Roadmaster, etc., Respondent, v. THE FRESNO CANAL AND IRRIGATION CO., Defendant, FRESNO MILLING CO., Intervenor, Appellant

         JUDGES: Fitzgerald, J. McFarland, J., and De Haven, J., concurred.

         OPINION

          FITZGERALD, Judge

         Action to abate an alleged public nuisance. Plaintiff had judgment, and the Fresno Mining Company, intervenor, appeals from the judgment and the order denying its motion for a new trial.

         It appears that certain material findings in this case are attacked by the specifications on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to support them.

         But as the respondent herein has not seen fit to file a brief, or to argue the case orally, we do not feel called upon to perform the duty of counsel by hunting through the record for the purpose of discovering evidence to support the findings, which it was his duty, if it existed, to point out to the court.

         Under such circumstances this court will assume, without looking into the record, that the point urged by appellant that the evidence is insufficient to justify the findings attacked, is well taken.

         Judgment and order reversed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Richter v. Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co.
(Mar 13, 1894)