Legal Opinion
Harazim v. Lynam
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 4, 1968No. Civ. 32172PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFourt, J.
Plaintiffs Henry J. and Zae H. Harazim, husband and wife, and Dorothy R. Duncan appeal from judgments of dismissal entered in these consolidated actions after general demurrers were sustained without leave to amend as to defendants Warren F. McLaren Applegate and George Lynam.
Appellants originally filed separate complaints based on essentially similar facts against all of the same defendants. These cases, which arose out of similar transactions, were consolidated for trial. The motions of defendants Applegate and Lynam for judgments on the pleadings were treated by the court as demurrers and…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Wennerholm v. Stanford University School of MedicineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Speegle v. Board of Fire UnderwritersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Seeger v. OdellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Valdez v. Taylor Automobile Co.California Court of Appeal · 1954
- Haviland v. Southern California Edison Co.California Supreme Court · 1916
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Committee on Children's Television, Inc. v. General Foods Corp.California Supreme Court · 1983
- City of Atascadero v. Merill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1999
- Nelson v. GauntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- Okun v. MortonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Wesley T. Bailey v. Chattem, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1982
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.