Legal Opinion

Lebet v. Cappobiancho

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 2, 1940No. Civ. A. 1251PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOOLING, Jr., J., pro tem.

This is an appeal from a judgment for $106 for damages to the rear of an automobile. Defendants proved in the trial court that plaintiff had been fully compensated for this damage by an insurance carrier. They then urged and urge on appeal that the insurance carrier became subrogated to all of plaintiff’s rights and was the real party in interest under Code of Civil Procedure section 367, and under that section the only party entitled to prosecute the action. They cite Offer v. Superior Court, 194 Cal. 114 [228 Pac. 11].

Plaintiff counters by citing Loggie v.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Offer v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Giselman v. StarrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Loggie v. Interstate Transit Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
  4. Inglewood Park Mausoleum Co. v. FergusonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  5. Ephraim v. Pacific BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. StarleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Waite v. GodfreyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
  3. Greene v. M. & S. Lumber Co.California Court of Appeal · 1951
  4. Aycrigg v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1954
  5. Lincoln General Insurance v. Access Claims Administrators, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2009

1 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