Legal Opinion

Petaluma Savings Bank v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided March 10, 1896No. S. F. No. 334PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Application for mandamus to the Superior-Court of the City and County of San Francisco. J. C. B. Her-bard, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.

This is an original proceeding by mandamus based upon the following facts:

Since the year 1887 there has been pending in the superior court of San Francisco an action for divorce, *491entitled George E. White v. Frankie White, in which a judgment was entered on May 15, 1879, granting a divoice to the defendant upon grounds stated in her cross-complaint. By said judgment she was awarded the community property and. $200 per month, further judgment being deferred until the coming in of the report of a referee appointed to take account of the community property and the separate property of the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Wiswall v. SampsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1853

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Murray v. MurrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  2. McAneny v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Cty.California Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Huellmantel v. HuellmantelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  4. De Forrest v. CoffeyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Nichols v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934

12 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