California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Richards v. Oliver, 162 Cal.App.2d 548, 328 P.2d 544 (Cal. App. 1958):
Appellant earnestly attacks other findings of the court as being unsupported by the evidence. He also urges inconsistency of the findings. We agree that some of the findings are contrary to the evidence, and some others are inconsistent, but we are confronted with the pertinent material and controlling finding that appellant was not induced to [162 Cal.App.2d 567] enter into the contract through false or mistaken representations, which is supported by substantial evidence, and since we have construed the contract as binding upon appellant in the absence of fraudulent, false or mistaken representations, the fact that findings on other, and therefore, irrelevant matters are not supported becomes immaterial in this case. As was stated in Culjak v. Better Built Homes, Inc., 58 Cal.App.2d 720, 725, 137 P.2d 492, 496:
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.