Legal Opinion

Heine Piano Co. v. Bloomer

California Supreme Court

Decided July 28, 1920No. S. F. No. 8703PublishedCited by 10 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtLawlor, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff, the Heine Piano Company, a corporation, and against the said defendants, G. C. Ringolsky, Frank T. Deasy, James G. Conlan, Robert W. Dennis, and Kohler & Chase, a corporation, in an action brought (1) to vacate the satisfaction of a judgment rendered in favor of the present plaintiff and against defendants Charles and Laura Olson in an action—hereinafter referred to as action 76,831—in the justice’s court of the city and county of San Francisco, and to revive said judgment; (2) to have said judgment “offset, . . . against…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. People v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  2. City of Oakland v. Oakland Water Front Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Simon v. Justice's CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Rockey v. VieuxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  5. Gleason v. SprayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Harrison v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. City of Los Angeles v. GlassellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Strauch v. BielohCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  4. Betty v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Hogeberg v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927

5 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