The San Francisco call., 1906-06-05
REFUSES TO CREATE A STATE DEBT
FIGHTS BURNT
RECORDS ACT
Lawyer Says Measure as
! it Now Stands Will
Hurt Gases.
sncclhl nIsnhteh to rhe Cali.

SACRAMENTO, June 4.-The thirty
lawyers comprising the judiciary Com
mittee of the ASSEMBLY are in guam
dary over the disposal of the proposed
burned records act" providing for
the disposition or actions and proceed
ings In which the court reporters rec
ords of the, proceedings OF the trials
have been lost Theodore Roche. as
representative of the law firm of Sui
livan Sullivan of San Francisco. ap-
peared before the committee today to
protest on behalf Of the firm of which
he is a member against the adoption
Of ANY act that will. as he claims. in
jnre at least 500 law cases in San
Francisco alone
The proposed act provides that
whenever the reporters notes of the
proceedings of any. action are lost or
destroyed without fault TO the parties
concerned and no transcript or bill of
| exceptions or statement of the case
containing such proceeding exists and
such action or proceeding is under
| submission or partially tried or sub
| ject to review by motion for new trial
| the court may set aside the submis-
| sion~of such action or proceeding and
grant a new <fial. of such action
The court is by the proposed act also
empowered to set aside trials or vacate
proceedings where 1t is deemed i'm
possible or in1practieahle to restore
| such proceedings SO that the court may
| decide an action or review judg-
| nent and may grant new trial If at
/ the time of the loss or destruction a
| motion for new trial be pending and
may reverse a Judgment and grant
| aew trial
The new act further provides that in
)rder tos grant a new trial it shall be
| Unnecessary TO have any bill of excep
lions or statement of the case that has
been settled or any transcript on ap-
| zeal printed. but upon the facts of de-
| ,truction being satisfactorily shown to
| the court by affldavit or otherwise the
| sourt shall have power in its discre-
| ion to grant new trial or to reverse
Or affirm the judgment,
Roche claims that this bill will in
juriouely affect the status of 500 trials
! In San Francisco alone, among them
such important cases as the Monnier
case, the Davis will contest and the
| Joseph P. Hales estate decisions, all of
which have been adjudicated. He
claims that to absolutely ignore the
judgments formerly given in these and
like cases will work absolute hardship
| on the successful litigants.
In the Monnier case in which George
Monnier sued his mother for a por-
| ton of his fathers estate, Sullivan &
| Sullivan representing the contestant,
| secured a favorable judgment from
| Judge Graham Under the new act
| this judgment could be set aside and
trial on appeal granted. placing the
/ n
owing to the destruction of his evil
dence.
In this case Sullivan & Sullivan
would be seriously affected in again
attempting the defense of case that
has been won. Again by the act Sui
Ivan & Sullivan would be gamers
in the Joseph P. Hales estate litigation
over which ran for many years in the
| San Francisco courts and resulted in
a decision adverse to the parties repre-
sefited by the law firm. In this case
Under the proposed act the adverse
judgment could be set aside and a
retrial of the case be made.
The Judiciary committee devoted
| most of it's morning session to a con-
sideration of the act as exploited in
this new light by Roche, but reached
no decision. 1t is the opinion of the
majority Of the members that the act
/ should stand with the important
Amendment of making IL obligatory on
the Judge to set aside trials and grant
retrails where the court records are de-
| stroyed. This would make the act
| more ironciad, but 1t appeared to meet
| with the favor of the greater part of
the committee, despite the objections
OF Roche
The matter was set for hearing at
the AFTERNOON meeting of the judiciary
committee. but action was postponed
owing to the consideration of the pro-
posed constitutional amendments.