Horsburgh v. Murasky
California Supreme Court
APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandamus directed to Frank J. Murasky, Judge of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Charles S. Wheeler, John F. Bowie, and Nathan Moran, for Petitioners.
1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.
Petitioners applied for a writ of mandate requiring the respondent as judge of the superior court to dismiss a certain action as to Frances B. Horsburgh. An alternative writ issued and the matter comes on regularly for decision and a determination whether or not the writ shall be made permanent.
The action in which petitioners were defendants was commenced on July 9, 1910, by Joseph B. Keenan and Carlotta Keenan, his wife, against a number of persons, including the Horsburghs. The complaint averred that they were husband and wife. The basis of the action was an alleged claim for damages for…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Matter of FordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Golden Gate Tile Co. v. Superior Court, in & for City of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1911
- Rowe v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Henley v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- McDonald v. PorshCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Whittel v. RocheCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1937
- Reynolds and Reynolds Co. v. Universal Forms, Labels & Systems, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 1997
- McClay v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916