Legal Opinion

King v. King

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 22, 1971No. Civ. 10569PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KAUFMAN, J.

By her first amended complaint plaintiff sought, in essence, to recover from defendant Keith King (hereinafter defendant) certain real property paid for by plaintiff but placed in defendant’s name during the existence of a confidential relationship between the parties and to recover damages for monies and securities appropriated by defendant during the relationship. The only other named defendant, State Mutual Savings and Loan Association, was dismissed as a party prior to trial. Although 10 Does were named as defendants, no person or entity was served as a Doe. Thus,…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Bank of California v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Muggill v. Reuben H. Donnelley Corp.California Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Lathrop v. BamptonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  4. Walling v. KimballCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. MacDermot v. HayesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Kraus v. Willow Park Public Golf CourseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  2. Martin v. KehlCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  3. Ferraro v. Southern California Gas Co.California Court of Appeal · 1980
  4. Galdjie v. DarwishCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  5. People v. George B.California Court of Appeal · 1991

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API