Broder v. Conklin
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from an order -of the Superior Court of Mono County directing the payment of moneys. W. H. Virden, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.
This appeal arises from an order made subsequent to judgment in the ease of Broder et al. v. Conklin et al, ante, p. 282. In view of the fact that the appeal from the judgment and order denying the motion for a new trial in the principal case has this day been held ineffectual, and the judgment and order affirmed, it would seem that the appeal in the present case, in its importance to appellants, has been reduced to very small proportions. Yet, nevertheless, it demands some consideration.
The facts are these: A receiver was appointed in the above-entitled cause. Upon a stipulation entered into…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- McCallion v. Hibernia Savings & Loan SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Baughman v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by7 opinions
- W. J. White Co. v. WintonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Coley v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- State Ex Rel. Tuemler v. GoldsteinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1922
- Julian v. SchwartzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- McCarthy v. KurkjianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.