Hale v. Bohannon
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
When sued in Humboldt County, Dolly Varden Lumber Company, a corporation, moved the court for a change of venue to the county of its principal place of business. The most important question presented for decision upon the appeal from an order denying that motion is whether section 395 of the Code of Civil Procedure is applicable to an action against a corporation.
Hale’s verified complaint alleges that, by the terms of a written contract, the lumber company agreed to pay him compensation for his services and a stated amount for certain personal property. Judgment is asked for the sums which,…
2Cases cited65 opinions
- Jersey Maid Milk Products Co. v. BrockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Andrews v. California Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1940
- Brady v. Times-Mirror Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
- Chesney v. ByramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
- McClung v. WattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by91 opinions
- Masterson v. SineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Stewart v. CoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- Casa Herrera, Inc. v. BeydounCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Tahoe National Bank v. PhillipsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Silicon Valley Taxpayers' Ass'n v. Santa Clara County Open Space AuthorityCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.