The record-union., 1899-06-13
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
sYLLABI.

SYLLABI.
Is. =. No. 1,021-Department One
Filed June Z, 1899
y. r. Gray ct AL, appellants; James
Escnen ct al, respondents. Action TO
recover Tor goods sold and delivered.
Affirmed.
w mere there is substantial conf1lct
~ the evidence. the findings of the
trial court will not be disturbed on APP
peal.
Inc law preSurnes that the proceed
anss IN the trial court were regular, and
!" mere error is claimed it is incumbent
Upon the appellant to SNOW it affirma-
lively.
An exception taken to each and every
poruion Of Judges charge is INSULT
euent. There must be a specification
VI the particular errors upon which the
appellant intends to rely. Consequent
~, where the court, ON the conclusion
OF It's charge, stated: 1T is understood
mat every portion Of the charge IS
ueemed excepted to by each counsel
deid, that proper exceptions were not
taken to the charge so as to entitie
tne instructions to reviewal in the S,.-
preme Court
Is. F. No. 1.113-Department Two
Filed June 8, 1899
John T. Doyle, plaintiff; Republic
Life Insurance Co., defendant; Sam
uel D. Ward, appellant Appeals dis
missed.
The sixty days during which an APP
peal must be taken dates from the en-
try of judgment not from an order
made after final judgment.
The procedure of this State neither
countenances nor permits the practice
of moving for new trial of a motion.
A subsequent order refusing to va
cate an appealable order, which has
been regularly and adv:sedly made, is
not appealable. Harper VS.. Hildreth,
80 CAL, 265.
(Sac. No. 541-Department Two-Filed
June 8, 1899
Helen Jane Grimbley, respondent; c..
H. Harold and the Grand Lodge, A. O.
U. W., defendants; C. H. Harold, APP
spellant. Beneficiary contract At
firmed.
The contract of a member in societies
such as the A. o. U. W., whereby he
assumes to dispose Of his interest in
the beneficiary fund of the order, when
valid, and not in conflict with the law
full conditions upon which the order
grants the insurance, is effectual
against the subsequent attempt of the
member to violate or annul it.
A board of arbitration called by the
Grand Master of a lodge to pass upon
claim presented by a. person not a
member of the order, lacks, rs concerns
the claimant, a prime essential of
legal body of arbdtrators, in that the
claimant has no voice in selecting the
members. 1t is really but a commit
tee upon which, under the rules of the
order the duty is devolved of answer
ing the claimants demand. The fact
that the claimant produces evidence
before it to support his claims, does
not convert the hearing into an arbi-
tration. See Kumle VS.. Grand Lodge,
A o. U. W., ITO Cal, 2O4.
Is. F. No. 956-Department Two-Ffled
June s, 1899
F. Z. Johnson, appellant; Bank Of
Lake, respondent. Stockholders liza
bility Reversed.
Section 359 c. c. P, provides that an
action against a stakeholder of a cor
poration to enforce a liability created
by law must be brought within three
years after the liability was created
The time Of the creation of the liability
must be determined by the terms and
conditions of the contract So, in a
contract for the employment of an at
forney to perform legal services, no
debt or liability is created, until the
requested services have been per-
formed; hence, the statute of lirnita-
tions does not start to run until that
time.
g. F. No. 1,091-Department Two
Filed June 8, 1880
Lemuel Peiser ct al, appellants;
Thomas H Griffith and Minnie L. Pei
ser RESPONDENTS: W b Bradbury in