Legal Opinion

Howard v. Thrifty Drug & Discount Stores

California Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1995No. S035703PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*429Opinion

MOSK, J.

In this case, we revisit our decision in Moran v. Superior Court (1983) 35 Cal.3d 229 [197 Cal.Rptr. 546, 673 P.2d 216] (Moran) to reconsider the relationship between the Judicial Arbitration Act (Code Civ. Proc.,1 § 1141.10 et seq.) and the statute requiring that an action be dismissed if it has not been brought to trial five years after filing the complaint. (§ 583.310.)2 In Moran we construed the meaning of section 1141.20, which requires trial courts to recalendar a case after arbitration “so that the trial shall be given the same place on the active list as it had prior to…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Denham v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman's Fund Ins. CompaniesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Moran v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Wilson v. Sunshine Meat & Liquor Co.California Supreme Court · 1983

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

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Bruns v. E-Commerce Exchange, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2011
  2. People v. SullivanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  3. People v. MartinezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  4. Jonathan Vo v. Las Virgenes Municipal Water DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  5. Byars v. SCME Mortgage Bankers, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2003

37 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