Legal Opinion
Satten v. Webb
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 14, 2002No. D037375PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HUFFMAN, J.
Plaintiff Dorothy Satten (Satten) appeals the order of dismissal entered against her after a demurrer to her complaint for malicious prosecution damages, brought by defendants and respondents Patrick D. Webb and his law firm, Webb & Carey, APC (collectively Webb), was sustained without leave to amend. The trial court ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to proceed with the malicious prosecution allegations, because they were based upon an underlying action that was within the exclusive jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court, in that it concerned the administration of the…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert & OlikerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- Ginns v. SavageCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964
- Richard Gonzales, Juliana Gonzales and Michael Dodge v. Barbara Parks and Jerome ParksCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Neilson v. City of California CityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Bounds v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- 108 HOLDINGS, LTD. v. City of Rohnert ParkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Alexander v. Exxon MobilCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Jones v. OmnitransCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.