Flashner v. Waldron

California Supreme Court
Flashner v. Waldron, 86 Cal. 211 (Cal. 1890)
24 P. 1063; 1890 Cal. LEXIS 1005
Paterson

Flashner v. Waldron

Opinion of the Court

Paterson, J.

The court below granted a motion for nonsuit, and judgment followed for the defendant. The plaintiff took no exception to the ruling. It is claimed that no exception was necessary, but it has been several times decided that an error in granting a nonsuit is an error in law, and must be excepted to. It is unnecessary, therefore, for us to consider the argument of counsel for appellant in support of his contention that the order granting a nonsuit is an order “ finally determining the *212rights of the parties,” and “deemed to have been excepted to,” under section 647 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Judgment affirmed.

Works, J., and Fox, J., concurred.

Reference

Full Case Name
MARY E. FLASHNER v. DAVID V. WALDRON
Cited By
5 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Appeal — Exceptions—Nonsuit — Error of Law — Order Deemed Excepted to. — An order granting a nonsuit cannot be reviewed on appeal, • if no exception was taken to the ruling, as an error of law, at the time thereof. The order cannot be deemed to have been excepted to upon the ground that it is an order finally determining the rights of the parties, under section 647 of the Code of Civil Procedure.