People's Home Savings Bank v. Superior Court of the City & County of San Francisco
California Supreme Court
MotioN in the Supreme Court for the substitution of attorneys. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.
The present proceeding is a motion for a substitution of attorneys in the above-entitled cause. Mr. James Alva Watt, claiming authority to represent the petitioner, makes the motion. The solution of the question here presented is dependent upon the following state of facts:
One E. H. Knight, a creditor, commenced an action in the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, Department No. 4, against the petitioner. People’s Home Savings Bank and its directors, for the purpose of enforcing his demand, and asked that the board of directors be enjoined from the further transaction of…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Bennett v. Hibernia BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Smith v. San Francisco & North Pacific Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
- Gage v. AtwaterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Alderman v. AldermanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1935
- Braude v. Automobile Club of Southern Cal.California Court of Appeal · 1986
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.