Legal Opinion
Rosenberg v. Bullard
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 3, 1932No. Docket No. 8645PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GRAY, J., pro tem.
Two writs of attachment, one for a demand of $27,850 and the other for a demand of $110,690, were respectively directed to and levied by the sheriffs of Los Angeles and Tulare Counties. Thereafter, a personal judgment for $65,350 was rendered against respondent, a resident of the state of Iowa, upon her default, after constructive service of summons. Heretofore respondent, unsuccessfully, attempted, by certiorari, to have reviewed an order denying her motion to quash service of summons and, by prohibition, to prevent further proceedings. (Bullard v. Superior Court, 106 Cal.…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Rosemead Co. v. Shipley Co.California Supreme Court · 1929
- Ponsonby v. Sacramento Suburban Fruit Lands Co.California Supreme Court · 1930
- Alexander v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Big Boy Drilling Corp. v. RankinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- San Francisco Iron & Metal Co. v. AbrahamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Martin v. SchilloIllinois Supreme Court · 1945
- DeMirjian v. Ideal Heating Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1949
- Peninsula Properties Co. v. County of Santa CruzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Barceloux v. DowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Murillo v. TooleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.