Legal Opinion

Southern Pacific Co. v. Schwartz

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 20, 1964No. Civ. No. 27310PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KINCAID, J. pro tem.*

Appeal is taken by Fred Schwartz from the judgment herein in favor of plaintiff, from order dismissing cross-complaint and from the order denying appellant’s motion for a new trial. No appeal lies from the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion for a new trial; that ruling may be reviewed only through an appeal from the judgment. (Hamasaki v. Flotho, 39 Cal. 2d 602, 608 [248 P.2d 910].)

Plaintiff’s complaint named the appellant Fred, Morris Schwartz, Jack Bulwa and Harry Smookler as defendants. The complaint alleges, in substance, that a balance of $3,040.04 was due…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hamasaki v. FlothoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Palmer v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Helvey v. United State Building & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In Re FryeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  2. Sarracino v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Sarracino v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API