Legal Opinion
Dandini v. Dandini
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 5, 1947No. Civ. 13366PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINLEY, J. pro tem.
At the time of the filing of this action plaintiff Lillian Eemillard Dandini and defendant A. 0. Dandini were husband- and wife. Plaintiff sought and was awarded judgment against said defendant for permanent support and maintenance. She also sought but was denied judgment setting aside and annulling the assignment and transfer by said A. 0. Dandini of 253 shares of stock of defendant Eemillard-Dandini Company, a corporation, to the defendants Sesenna.
The trial court found said stock to be the property of 0. Creste Sesenna and Rose Cungi Sesenna, husband and wife (also known…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Haines v. Commercial Mortgage Co.California Supreme Court · 1927
- Hansen v. Bear Film Co.California Supreme Court · 1946
- Simon v. Justice's CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Hart v. ChurchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Jackson v. ShawlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Remillard Brick Co. v. Remillard-Dandini Co.California Court of Appeal · 1952
- Chuck v. AlvesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Commonwealth v. TerjenSupreme Court of Virginia · 1956
- Dandini v. DandiniCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Perske v. PerskeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.