Legal Opinion
Tomb v. Tomb
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 4, 1932No. Docket No. 8238PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JAMISON, J., pro tem.
This is an appeal from the order of the court setting aside and vacating an interlocutory and final decree of divorce alleged to have been fraudulently obtained.
The facts briefly stated are as follows:
On May 8, 1923, James E. Tomb filed an action for divorce against his wife, the defendant. On May 11, 1923, defendant filed her answer denying the material allegations of the complaint which answer was, by stipulation of the parties, withdrawn on May 31, 1923. On said last-named date a property settlement was made by the said Tomb and wife. By this settlement the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McGuinness v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Rehfuss v. RehfussCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Aldrich v. AldrichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- McKeever v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
3Cited by21 opinions
- Estate of EstremCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- Fiske v. BuderCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1942
- Deyl v. DeylCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Britton v. BrysonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Peters v. PetersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.