Legal Opinion
In re Muller & Kennedy
California Supreme Court
Decided October 4, 1897No. Sac. No. 146PublishedCited by 9 opinions
APPEAL from a judgment of tbe Superior Court of San Joaquin County. Joseph PI. Budd, Judge. Tbe facts are stated in tbe opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
When this ease was in Department tbe opinion hereto attached was prepared by the commissioners, and, tbe justices of tbe Department not being able to agree as to the *433proper disposition of the appeal, the case was ordered into Bank. After due consideration of the case in Bank, we are satisfied with the conclusion reached by the commissioners; and for the reasons given in their opinion the judgment is affirmed. The opinion prepared by the commissioners is as follows:
SEAELS, C.
“This is an appeal by petitioning creditors from an order of the superior court in and for the county of San…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Brashear v. WestSupreme Court of the United States · 1833
- Bull v. BrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Saurderson v. BroadwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- In re the Disbarment of LuceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Haas v. WhittierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. PostedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Hibernia Savings & Loan Society v. BelcherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Roberts v. BurrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Ferguson v. LarsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Dandini v. DandiniCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.