Case Name: AH MOUIE, Respondent, v. BURNS and CARPENTER, Appellants
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1872-11-15
Citations: 1 Cal. Unrep. 763
Docket Number: No. 3458
Parties: AH MOUIE, Respondent, v. BURNS and CARPENTER, Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Unreported Cases
Volume: 1
Pages: 763–763

Head Matter:
AH MOUIE, Respondent, v. BURNS and CARPENTER, Appellants.
No. 3458;
November 15, 1872.
New Trial — New Evidence Merely Cumulative. — A motion for a new trial, based on alleged newly discovered evidence is properly denied when from the accompanying affidavits it appears that the evidence newly discovered is only cumulative.
APPEAL from Seventeenth Judicial District, Los Angeles County.
O. Melveney & Hazard for respondent; McConnell & King for appellants.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
— One of the principal questions at the trial — if not the only question — was as to the ownership of the money and watch taken from the person of the plaintiff at the jail. The finding of the court was in favor of the plaintiff, and the motion for a new trial was based wholly upon alleged newly discovered evidence — that set forth in the affidavit of Dye. Upon looking into that affidavit, we think that it is merely cumulative in its character, and that the motion for a new trial was properly denied.
Judgment and order denying new trial affirmed.