Los Angeles herald., 1891-09-01
SEVEN DECISIONS
Handed Down from the Court
of the Last Guess.
A Self Confessed FOrger Al
lowed a New Trial.
Several Interesting Legal Points
of View.
A Case Involving Twelve Thousand
Dozen of Eggs-Garnsey YER
sus GOthard-Other
Opinions.

Seven supreme court decisions on
cases that have been appealed from
Southern California tribunals were re-
ceived in this city yesterday by Deputy
Supreme Court Clerk M. j. Ashmore.
In the case of the people We. IL. N. Eli
oft, who is now in San Quentin serving
out sentence for forging the name of
"Red Rice" the judgment of the lower
court is reversed and a new trial or
dered. The decision in the case says:
"The defendant was convicted of the
crime of forgery and appealed to this
court from the judgment and order de-
nying his motion for new trial. He
was charged by the information with
forging certain check signed "E. A.
Rice & Co." The evidence in the case
is as follows
cat the time the defendant procured
money on the check he stated that
"Red Rice" who was engaged in the
furniture business at the city of Los
Angeles, gave him the check as the re-
suit of a transaction in furniture. cred
Rice" testified that his name was Edwin
A. Rice; that at the time OF the
alleged forgery he had partner, and
the name of the firm was Rice 4 Nc
Kee, and that he did not sign the check
or authorize it to be signed. The de-
fendant confessed that he forged the
check.
"It is elementary law that the de-
fendant cannot be convicted upon his
confession alone, and in this case there
is no evidence whatever as to the ex-
istence of such firm as E. A. Rice &
Co. and non constat, but that there was
such firm and the check was genuine.
If we assume that there was such a firm
in existence, then the Judgment must
he reversed and new trial ordered, by
reason of the insufficiency of the evil
dence in not showing that the check
was not signed by such firm. If we
assume that there was no no such firm
in existence, then the check was fcti-
tious check and the prosecution should
have been had under section 476 of the
Penal Code, and the case must be re-
versed upon that ground.'
The decision reverses the order and
judgment and remands the case for
new trial. The opinion is signed by the
entire court.
A CELEBRATED EGG CASE.
In the case of Ramish, respondent,
vs.. Kerschbraun ct al, appellants,
which involves the price to be paid for
$4,000 dozen eggs, the judgment and
order of the lower court is reversed and
a new trial ordered. Gould d Stanford
appeared for the appellants and Del
Vale & Munday for the respondents.
The decision in this case, which is of
considerable interest, is as follows:
1T is alleged in the complaint that
on or about June %, 1888, the defend
ants agreed to deliver to plaintiff at Los
Angeles $4,000 dozen OF eggs for the
sum of 1,770, as soon as the same could
be transported by rail from Omaha,
Nebraska; that the eggs arrived at Los
Angeles on July 8, 1888, but defendants
did not deliver them to plaintiff until
July 14th, although he was ready and
willing at all times on and after the 9Th
to receive and pay for them; that by
reason of the failure of defendants
to deliver the eggs to plaintiff,
upon their arrival at Los An
geles, he sustained damages to
filed an answer denying each and every
allegation. Judgment was entered on a
verdict in favor of plaintiff for 5000, and
defendants appealed.
''It will be seen from this statement of
plaintiffs cause of action that his claim
is based upon the facts that defendants
failed to deliver the eggs before July
18th, although they actually arrived at
Los Angeles on the 9Th, and that be-
tween these dates the price of eggs had
deprecated, incurring loss to him OF
5000 on the lot. In his testimony plain
tiff stated that the market price of eggs
was highest on the day and the day after
the eggs arrived at LosAngeles. After that
several carloads came into the market
and the price went down. He was per-
mitted by the court to state that he had
contracted with Stanley & Henry to sell
the eggs to them for twenty-one cents,
but on account of the failure of defen-
dants to deliver them in time, he lost
the sale and was obliged to sell the eggs
at fraction over sixteen cents per
dozen.
1.-The court ought to have sustained
defendants objection to the evidence as
to what Stanley & Henry had agreed to
pay plaintiff for the eggs.
''The court erred in more serious
particular: 1t permitted a witness,
called on behalf of plaintiff, to state that
about the time the eggs arrived at Los
Angeles they were worth twenty-one
cents per dozen.
The damages claimed by plaintiff were
sustained by him, according to the allie
cations of his complaint, between the
8th and l4th; any evidence, therefore,
showing the market value OF eggs sub
sequent to the l4th, was clearly mad
missible.
SIT is claimed by appellants, that
there was no contract to deliver the eggs
at any particular time, and therefore
plaintiff failed to prove any cause of
action. On this subject the court fairly
instructed the jury, and as the case
must be sent back for a new trial we
will not express any opinion as to the
weight of the evidence. Judgment and
order reversed"
GARNsEY We. GoTHARD,
In the case of Garnsey ct al, respond
ents, vs. Gothard ct al, appallen. 8, an
action for the specific performance of a
contract whereby defendant Gothard
and his late wife agreed to convey TO the
plaintiff certain tract of land and
forty shares of water stock, the iudg-
ment is reversed except as to one parti-
cular. The purchase price agreed upon