Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Santa Monica Finance Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtFord, J.
The defendant has appealed from the granting of a preliminary injunction.
The verified complaint, upon the basis of which the pre*213liminary injunction was issued, contains allegations as follows: 1. The plaintiff is a corporation and qualified to transact and actually engaged in transacting a general insurance and surety-ship business in the state of California. 2. Defendant is a corporation engaged in transacting business in the county of Los Angeles. 3. Douglass V. Neale, at all times mentioned in the complaint, was licensed as a used-automobile dealer under the laws of the state of California…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Philbrook v. RandallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Kurlan v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1953
- Kane v. MendenhallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- Trans-Pacific Trading Co. v. Patsy Frock & Romper Co.California Supreme Court · 1922
- McPhetridge v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Cronus Investments, Inc. v. Concierge Services, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003