Legal Opinion

Ross v. O'Brien

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 14, 1935No. Civ. 1173PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HARDEN, J., pro tem.

This is an action to recover damages for alleged malicious prosecution of a criminal action against J. Edgar Ross, plaintiff herein. At the conclusion of a jury trial the court directed a verdict for the defendant. Plaintiff appeals from a judgment entered thereon.

Appellant has failed to comply with the requirements of section 953c of the Code of Civil Procedure by printing in his brief or in a supplement thereto such portions of the record as he desires to call to the attention of the court; and respondent has filed no brief whatever.

An action was started in the Justice’s…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Heath v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1860
  3. Moore v. DurrerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  4. Reed v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
  5. Sinsheimer v. WhitelyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Jiménez v. SánchezSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1954
  2. People v. ScrivensCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  3. Thomas v. HintonIdaho Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Jackson v. BeckhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  5. Keylon v. KelleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961

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