Legal Opinion

Wilson v. Wilson

California Supreme Court

Decided May 27, 1960No. Sac. 7018PublishedCited by 57 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOOLING, J. pro tem.*

Defendants appeal from a summary judgment entered against them in an action on a promissory note. They also appeal from an order sustaining plaintiff’s demurrer to their counterclaim and from an order denying defendants’ motion for a summary judgment. These orders are not appealable (Jeffers v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc., *266107 Cal.App.2d 253, 254 [237 P.2d 51] ; Schulze v. Schulze, 121 Cal.App.2d 75, 83 [262 P.2d 646]), and the attempted appeals therefrom will be dismissed.

The controlling question is whether the trial court ■properly granted plaintiff’s motion for a…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Desny v. WilderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Eagle Oil & Refining Co. v. PrenticeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Estate of RuleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  4. McCluskey v. WareCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Puckett v. PuckettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943

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

3Cited by57 opinions

  1. Serrano v. UnruhCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Goodley v. Wank & Wank, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1976
  3. Glendale Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Marina View Heights Development Co.California Court of Appeal · 1977
  4. Management Services Corp. v. Development AssociatesUtah Supreme Court · 1980
  5. Coast Bank v. HolmesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971

52 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