Legal Opinion
Kirsch v. Barnes
District Court, N.D. California
Decided December 18, 1957No. Civ. 7477PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HALBERT, District Judge.
This Court by its Memorandum and Order of June 24, 1957 (153 F.Supp. 260), dismissed plaintiff’s original complaint and the cause of action sought to be set forth therein. Plaintiff has now filed a motion seeking permission to file an amended complaint in this action.
The facts, which the original complaint alleged to exist, are set forth at length in this Court’s earlier Memorandum and Order. The complaint now sought to be filed contains no allegations which materially affect the factual composition as previously set forth. Only the emphasis is shifted. Specifically,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Dabney v. EdwardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Gudger v. MantonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Helene Marceau Sidebotham v. W. L. Robison, Administrator of the Estate of Robert Sidebotham, Deceased, and Robert Sidebotham and James SidebothamCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
- Kelly v. Delaware River Joint CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1951
- German-American Sav. Bank v. GollmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Smith v. BrovanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- Wineberg v. MooreDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1961
- Irons v. GottschalkDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1974
- CB Lewes, LLC v. Brightfields, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 2022
- Darr v. Lone Star Industries, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1979
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.