Legal Opinion

Kaplan v. Hacker

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 8, 1952No. Civ. 18700PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.

Plaintiff appeals from (1) an order requiring him, upon payment of $300.10 by the defendant, to execute and file a satisfaction of the judgment herein; and (2) an order denying his motion to reopen the hearing on the motion to compel satisfaction of the judgment.

Plaintiff recovered a judgment against defendant in May, 1949. Partial satisfaction was filed in February, 1950. In July, 1950, plaintiff filed with the clerk an unacknowledged document purporting to be an assignment of the judgment to one A1 Kaplan. No notice, however, of such assignment was given defendant and no action has been…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Buckeye Refining Co. v. KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Mazzenga v. RossoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  3. Schomer v. R. L. Craig Co.California Court of Appeal · 1934
  4. Hurley v. Lake CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  5. Bovais v. CassassaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Grunwald-Marx, Inc. v. Los Angeles Joint BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Domarad v. Fisher & Burke, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1969
  3. Guardianship of Phillip B.California Court of Appeal · 1983
  4. Jhaveri v. TeitelbaumCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  5. Chung v. JohnstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954

7 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