Legal Opinion

Christina v. R. Z. Adams Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 20, 1936No. Civ. No. 10920PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHouser, P. J.

It appears that, as grounds for an order by which their demurrer to the complaint in the above-entitled action would be sustained, the defendants specified not only that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, but as well, that the alleged *140cause of action was barred by the provisions of subsection 1 of section 337 of the Code of Civil Procedure; and that the ruling on said demurrer that was made by the trial court, as was shown by the minute entry thereof, was that “by consent said demurrer is sustained without leave to amend”.

Respondents contend that…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Reed v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Adams v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Wilson v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  2. Johns v. JohnsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  3. Williams v. Sacramento River Cats Baseball Club, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API