Legal Opinion

Hastain & Purman, Inc. v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided June 22, 1931No. Docket No. L.A. 12783PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.

The alternative writ of mandate is discharged and the petition is denied. The following considerations justify this action.

The question is whether or not petitioner’s appeal from a judgment of the Justice’s Court of Montebello Township, Los Angeles County, California, to the Superior Court of said county, authorizes a trial de nova therein under section 976 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The action here under consideration was begun on May 16, 1929, tried upon its merits in said Justice’s Court on August 16, 1929, decided on August 30, 1929, and from the judgment that day entered in favor of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Puterbaugh v. WadhamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  2. People v. Wong WangCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Hammond v. HazardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  4. County of Los Angeles v. Justice's CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Hirsch v. All PersonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Coombes v. FranklinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Beal v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API