Lattin v. Hazard
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Gibson, C.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon plaintiffs’ failure to amend their complaint after a general demurrer thereto had been sustained.
It is alleged in the complaint that plaintiffs are husband and wife; that on March 9,'1887, at Los Angeles, the defendant and sundry other persons, as parties of the first part, and James McLaughlin, as the party of the second part, made and entered into a written agreement whereby the defendant, Hazard, and others, as parties of the first part, in consideration of the benefits to accrue to them, and desiring to have a steam-dummy railroad…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Johnson v. KaeserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Pembrook v. HoustonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Lattin v. HazardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Miller & Lux, Inc. v. San Joaquin Light & Power Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1932
- Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2001
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.