Candelaria v. Miera.

Decision Date31 January 1906
Citation13 N.M. 362,84 P. 1021
PartiesCANDELARIAv.MIERA.
CourtNew Mexico Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from District Court, Sandoval County; before Justice Ira A. Abbott.

Action by Paulita Candelaria, by Emigran Candelaria, her guardian, against Epimenio A. Miera. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Findings and judgment, supported by substantial evidence, will not be disturbed.

George W. Prichard and E. V. Chaves, for appellant.

Summers Burkhart, for appellee.

PARKER, J.

The facts in this case are the same as in the case of Andres Candelaria v. Epimenio A. Miera (decided at this term) 84 Pac. 1020, and the judgment will be affirmed upon the authority of that case; and it is so ordered.

MILLS, C. J., and McFIE, POPE, and MANN, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Bunton v. Hull
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of New Mexico
    • 6 February 1947
    ...361, 161 P. 1183; James v. Hood, 19 N.M. 234, 142 P. 162; Jenkins v. Maxwell Land Grant Co., 15 N.M. 281, 107 P. 739; Candelaria v. Miera, 13 N.M. 362, 84 P. 1021. Although appellant in his motion for a new trial claims that the court erred in refusing to give his requested instructions Nos......
  • BUNTON v. HULL
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of New Mexico
    • 6 February 1947
    ...N.M. 361, 161 P. 1183; James v. Hood, 19 N.M. 234, 142 P. 162; Jenkins v. Maxwell Land Grant Co., 15 N.M. 281, 107 P. 739; Candelaria v. Miera, 13 N.M. 362, 84 P. 1021. Although appellant in his motion for a new trial claims that the court erred in refusing to give his requested instruction......
  • Goldenberg v. Law.D1
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of New Mexico
    • 24 March 1913
    ...evidence. The rule was stated succinctly by Mr. Justice Parker, for the territorial Supreme Court, in the case of Candelaria v. Miera, 13 N. M. 362, 84 Pac. 1021, as follows: “Ordinarily, neither the verdict of a jury nor the findings of fact of a trial court will be disturbed in this court......
  • Goldenberg v. Law
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of New Mexico
    • 24 March 1913
    ...evidence. The rule was stated succinctly by Mr. Justice Parker, for the territorial Supreme Court, in the case of Candelaria v. Miera, 13 N.M. 362, 84 P. 1021, follows: "Ordinarily, neither the verdict of a jury nor the findings of fact of a trial court will be disturbed in this court when ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT