Legal Opinion

Oldershaw v. Matteson & Williamson Manufacturing Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 27, 1912No. Civ. No. 1019PublishedCited by 7 opinions

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Kern County denying a motion for a new trial. Paul W. Bennett, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Wm. B. Beaizley, Louis Luckel, and J. P. Jones, for Appellants.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

Appeal from an order denying defendants’ motion for a new trial.

By stipulation filed it was agreed by counsel for the respective parties “that no briefs need be printed in the cause, but that the same may be heard and submitted upon the printed briefs filed in the case of W. H. Esdohr, plaintiff and appellant, v. Annie Cox Oldershaw and C. D. Oldershaw, defendant and respondents, L. A. No. 2979, in the supreme court, . . . and that printed copies of the briefs in said last-mentioned cause may be filed in the above-entitled cause as the briefs of the respective parties.” Accordingly, no briefs…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. In Re Estate of PepperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Couts v. WinstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Diefendorff v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Lewis v. JohnsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
  5. Carle v. HellerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Estate of NeilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Loeb v. KimmerleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Estate of MilesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  4. Gray v. PerlisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  5. Phelps v. DaviesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932

2 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