Legal Opinion
Kauffman v. Bobo & Wood
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 1, 1950No. Civ. 7790PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, P. J.
On this appeal the sufficiency of the third cause of action contained in plaintiffs’ second amended complaint is alone involved. To that count the trial court sustained a demurrer, on both general and special grounds, without leave to amend. The only question presented here is whether or not the said court erred.
It is well established that a general demurrer must be overruled if, on any theory, it states a cause of action (Lord v. Garland, 27 Cal.2d 840, 853 [168 P.2d 5]; Johnson v. Clark, 7 Cal.2d 529, 536 [61 P.2d 767]); and that it shall not be sustained without leave to amend if it is…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Wennerholm v. Stanford University School of MedicineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Speegle v. Board of Fire UnderwritersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Olivera v. GraceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Buxbom v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Columbia Pictures Corp. v. DeTothCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Lavine v. JessupCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Middlebrook-Anderson Co. v. Southwest Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
- Commercial Standard Insurance v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Cantor v. AndersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- Harazim v. LynamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.