Legal Opinion
Orly v. Russell
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 25, 1921No. Civ. No. 3504PublishedCited by 5 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.
The plaintiff sued the defendant in an action of forcible entry and unlawful detainer; a trial was had before the court sitting with a jury; the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for the restitution of the premises and $450 damages. The defendant moved for a new trial on all of the statutory grounds, the motion was denied, and the defendant has appealed under section 953a of the Code of Civil Procedure.
One Hamble owned a building on Macdonald Avenue, in the city of Richmond, which building was divided into two compartments, one known as 1100 and the other as 1102 Macdonald…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hawthorne v. SiegelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- San Francisco & Suburban Home Building Society v. LeonardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
- Martin v. SplivaloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Castro v. TewksburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Frazier v. LynchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Palmer v. ZeisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Knight v. Fox Caldwell Theatres CorporationIdaho Supreme Court · 1949
- Field v. WaltonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Read v. La ShonseIdaho Supreme Court · 1927
- Rosano v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983