Legal Opinion

Chichester v. Golden

District Court, S.D. California

Decided April 18, 1962No. 924-61PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

YANKWICH, District Judge.

The above entitled cause heretofore tried, argued and submitted is now decided as follows:

Upon the grounds stated in the Comment to follow judgment will be for the plaintiff as follows:

1. That plaintiff do have and recover of the defendants Howard Golden, Lucille Golden and Ruth S. Feldhorn only, the sum of $23,611.86 with interest from date of judgment.

2. That no exemplary damages in any amount be awarded against the above-named or any of the other defendants.

3. That plaintiff take nothing against the defendants Michael Golden, Stephen Golden, Judy Lynne Golden, a…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Sampsell v. Imperial Paper & Color Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. Smellie v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Shapiro v. WilgusSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  4. Fish v. EastCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1940
  5. Daniels v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Mack v. NewtonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1984
  2. Gross v. Russo (In Re Russo)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · 1982
  3. Hutchison v. BoneyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Egan v. Oliver (In Re Oliver)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · 1984
  5. Chichester v. GoldenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963

4 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