Fry v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtPeek, J.
This is an appeal by defendant from a money judgment in an action to recover damages for malicious prosecution and from the orders of the court denying its motion for a new trial and its motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
The plaintiffs, because of Mr. Fry’s work as a mechanic on construction jobs, had lived in various parts of the state. Likewise because of the nature of his work they lived in a house trailer. Their permanent address, however, was the residence of their son-in-law at Redding. For several years, wherever they happened to be, they did all of their banking with…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- White v. BrinkmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
- Centers v. Dollar MarketsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Sandoval v. Southern California Enterprises Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1950
- Hudson v. ZumwaltCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Bernstein v. MaimesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Albertson v. RaboffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Jackson v. BeckhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Weber v. LeuschnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Pepper v. BishopCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- Northrup v. BakerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.