Legal Opinion
Norton v. Hoffmann
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 21, 1939No. Civ. 2419PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HAINES, J., pro tem.—
The complaint in this action is in six counts. In the first count plaintiff and appellant alleges that he was, on October 10, 1892, duly admitted and licensed to practice as an attorney and counselor at law in all the courts of the State of California, and that at all times mentioned in his complaint, and for nearly half a century, he has been such attorney and counselor at law in good standing, admitted to practice law and entitled to practice the same in the courts of the State of California and in the federal courts.
It is alleged that in August, 1933, defendant The…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Bradley v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Spalding v. VilasSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Standard Oil Co. v. City of LincolnSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Douglass v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Griffith v. SlinkardIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- White v. TowersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Wilson v. SharpCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Dawson v. MartinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Martelli v. PollockCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Oppenheimer v. TamblynCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.