Ah Goon v. Tarpey

California Supreme Court
Ah Goon v. Tarpey, 2 Cal. Unrep. 483 (Cal. 1885)
7 P. 188

Ah Goon v. Tarpey

Opinion of the Court

By the COURT.

1. The difference in the names Ah Yak and Ah Jack; also as to whether the men were employed to be paid one dollar, or a dollar and a quarter, or a dollar and a half; and the statement in the assignment that the contract was with the Melrose Smelting & Refining Works—if variances, were immaterial, and misled no one: Code Civ. Proc., sec. 469.

2. The court did not err in striking out that portion of the answer relating to garnishment; it contained no defense to the action stated in the complaint.

Judgment and order affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
AH GOON v. TARPEY and Others
Status
Published
Syllabus
Appeal—Immaterial Variance.—Reversal is not Warranted by-variances between allegations and- proof which are immaterial, if no one is misled thereby.