# Roche v. Baldwin

> California Supreme Court · February 18, 1902 · 135 Cal. 522

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3304168

## Case

- **Full name:** ALBERT T. ROCHE, Respondent, v. E. J. BALDWIN, Appellant
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** February 18, 1902
- **Citations:** 135 Cal. 522; 65 P. 459; 1902 Cal. LEXIS 837
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence
- **Judges:** Henshaw, McFARLAND, Temple, Van Dyke
- **Cited by:** 18 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3304168

## Opinion text

I concur in the judgment, on the ground that the instruction discussed in the opinion is erroneous and may have been injurious. It rendered it unnecessary for the jury to determine the question of fact in regard to the terms of the employment.
Harrison, J., and Beatty, C.J., concurred.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3304168. Public record. Not legal advice.