Legal Opinion

McClenahan v. Howard

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 7, 1920No. Civ. No. 3101PublishedCited by 3 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

WOOD, P. J., pro tem.

Plaintiff sought by this action to recover a sum slightly in excess of eighteen hundred dollars for professional -services rendered by him as an alienist, to and for the defendant, and at her request. The trial judge found that on January 8, 1915, the plaintiff rendered medical services to the defendant of the reasonable value of forty-five dollars at a time when she was unconscious and in need of medical attention. The court found also that at other times between January 8 and April 21,1915, plaintiff rendered professional services as an expert alienist in examining and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Evans v. JohnsonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Berry v. BerryIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
  3. In re Guardianship of WelchWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Jones v. LearnedColorado Court of Appeals · 1902
  5. Karnes v. JohnstonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1906

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. McClenahan v. KeyesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Guardianship of CookinghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  3. McClenahan v. KeyesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924

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

Powered by the Exa API