Legal Opinion

In Re Kling

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 28, 1920No. Civ. No. 3326PublishedCited by 5 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

A proceeding for the disbarment of appellant as an attorney at law was instituted in the superior court by the Los Angeles Bar Association. The trial thereof resulted in an order made suspending him from practicing his profession. On appeal therefrom the judgment was reversed (Matter of Kling, 44 Cal. App. 267, [186 Pac. 152]) upon the ground that the same .was not warranted by the evidence. Upon the going down of the remittitur, appellant served and filed his bill for costs and disbursements made at the trial and on appeal, to which respondent interposed a motion to retax, strike out and…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Falkner v. HendyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Empire Gold Mining Co. v. Bonanza Gold Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1885
  3. In re EatonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Sharp v. MillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Ryan v. TomlinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Weightman v. HadleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  2. Schubert v. BatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Markart v. ZeimerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  4. Krikorian Premiere Theatres, LLC v. Westminster Central, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  5. Schubert v. BatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API