Legal Opinion

Pendergrass v. Axx

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 2, 1931No. Docket Nos. 6523, 6524PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMPSON (IRA F.), J.

Two actions were commenced in the court below by the plaintiff Pendergrass, the one against Josephine M. Axx individually for money had and received in the sum of $1200, and the other against her in her representative capacity as executrix of the last will and testament of Ada F. Brinkworth, deceased, to recover, first, the sum of $471.50, the value of certain property claimed by the plaintiff to which it was alleged the defendant asserted title; second, the sum of $3,300 for services rendered; third, $1309.60 to cover obligations of the deceased alleged to have been paid…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Stanley v. WestoverCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  2. McGee v. City of San JoseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
  3. McGlew v. McDadeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Zeigler v. BonnellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  2. Tabata v. MuraneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Edmonds v. PerryNevada Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Thompson v. ThompsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  5. Tarvin v. DaveyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943

2 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