Legal Opinion
Oppenheimer v. Tamblyn
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 15, 1959No. Civ. 23167PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShinn, P. J.
Action against W. D. Tamblyn and others for malicious prosecution. Following the sustaining of a demurrer interposed by defendant Roger Arnebergh with leave to amend, plaintiff filed an amended complaint against Arnebergh only. Arnebergh demurred to the amended complaint. The court sustained his demurrer without leave to amend and entered judgment in his favor. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment dismissing the action as to Arnebergh.
The amended complaint alleges: On or about February 15, 1955, defendant maliciously and without probable cause “filed a complaint and instituted a criminal…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Jaffe v. StoneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Barrier v. AlexanderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Roos v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Norton v. HoffmannCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- Oppenheimer v. TamblynCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Daly v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- Maxon v. Security Insurance of New Haven ConnecticutCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Union Oil of California, Amsco Div. v. WatsonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
- Kroger Company v. PuckettCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1977
- Bearup v. BearupCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1979
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.