Legal Opinion

Hitch v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 26, 1934No. Civ. 10028PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILLIS, J., pro tem.

This is a proceeding in mandamus to compel the respondent, superior court to set a divorce case for trial. In September, 1932, one Lucy Bays filed an action for divorce on the ground of extreme cruelty. Defendant therein answered joining issues on the complaint, and as part thereof added his cross-complaint seeking divorce on the same ground. No answer has been filed to the cross-complaint and no allegation is made that default has been entered for failure to answer the same. In November of 1932, under sections 2168 to 2172, inclusive, of the Political Code, respondent…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wiedwald v. DodsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  2. American Securities Co. v. ForwardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Mutual Bldg. & Loan Ass'n of Long Beach v. CorumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Fetterley v. RandallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  5. In re the Guardianship of the Person & Estate of CarnigliaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Irvine v. GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Carroll v. CarrollCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  3. State v. BucyMontana Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Carroll v. CarrollCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Irvine v. GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941

2 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