Legal Opinion

Pena v. City of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 28, 1970No. Civ. 34876PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

IRWIN, J. *

Appellants instituted this action to seek a declaration that they were lawfully entitled to be appointed at the various times they were first certified for appointment as policemen of the City of Los Angeles, and that respondents cause appellants’ service records to be corrected accordingly. Respondents, by their answer, pleaded the statute of limitations (Code Civ. Proc., § 338, subd. 1) as a defense. Appellants appropriately amended their pleadings to offset this defense by alleging estoppel. Trial was had and judgment in favor of the respondents was ordered pursuant to…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Maguire v. Hibernia Savings & Loan SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Driscoll v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Albers v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Abbott v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Dillon v. Board of Pension CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Kupka v. Board of AdministrationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
  2. Bradshaw v. Zoological Society of San DiegoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978
  3. Fenske v. Board of AdministrationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
  4. California Teachers' Ass'n v. Governing BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
  5. United Pacific-Reliance Insurance v. DidomenicoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985

3 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