Legal Opinion

MacGruer v. Denivelle

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 27, 1931No. Docket No. 7467PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WARD, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment in favor of defendant in an action for maliciously obtaining an injunction. The respondent Denivelle had been in the imitation travertine business in eastern states; about 1912 he became the supervisor of all artificial travertine work for the Panama Pacific International Exposition at San Francisco. At such time the appellants MacGruer and Simpson (co-partners) had a contract for plain and ornamental plastering on Machinery Hall, one of the Panama Pacific International Exposition buildings. During this period appellants…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Burke v. WattsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Runo v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Griswold v. GriswoldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  5. Vesper v. Crane Co.California Supreme Court · 1913

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hudson v. ZumwaltCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  2. Monolith Portland Midwest Co. v. Reconstruction Finance Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 1955
  3. Schubkegel v. GordinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  4. Schubkegel v. GordinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  5. Schubkegel v. GordinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API