Legal Opinion
Linnick v. Sedelmeier
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 7, 1968No. Civ. 31084PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
COLLINS, J. pro tem. *
In this case there exists a question of jurisdiction which, although not raised or decided in the court below, demands our attention at the threshold of appellate review.
The facts bearing on this jurisdiction are these: On December 29, 1964, plaintiff commenced an action in the Municipal Court of Moorp'ark-Camárílló'. Judicial District, Ventura County, California, 2 to recover a balance of $3,750 allegedly due on two promissory notes. On January 14, 1965, defendant filed an answer in which he admitted the execution of the notes pursuant to an agreement for the sale and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Abelleira v. District Court of AppealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Morris v. GilmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Keenan v. DeanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- Sellery v. WardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Wexler v. GoldsteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
3Cited by9 opinions
- California Redevelopment Ass'n v. MatosantosCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
- Walker v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- Minor v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- California Redevelopment Ass'n v. MatosantosCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
- Ash v. Hertz Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.