Legal Opinion

Bedolla v. Logan & Frazer

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 15, 1975No. Civ. 33832PublishedCited by 70 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KANE, J.

Cross-Complainants Parkside Development Company, a limited partnership, and Charles Bedolla, receiver for Parkside Develop-[Oct. ment Company (hereinafter “Parkside” or “appellant”) appeal from the trial court’s judgment entered on jury verdicts finding that the claims raised in the cross-complaint were barred by the statute of limitations. The intricate factual background leading to the controversy may be set out as follows:

Commencing in 1953, Richard H. Grant (“Grant”) and Way Choy Ching (“Ching”) solicited funds from the Chinese American community in Honolulu, Hawaii, to…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Neel v. Magana, Olney, Levy, Cathcart & GelfandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  3. United States Liability Insurance v. Haidinger-Hayes, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Vai v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Agnew v. ParksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959

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

3Cited by70 opinions

  1. Clemens v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  2. Wyatt v. Union Mortgage Co.California Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Sun'n Sand, Inc. v. United California BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Cervantez v. J. C. Penney Co.California Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Valerio v. Boise Cascade Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 1978

65 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