Legal Opinion

Foster v. Banks

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 17, 1931No. Docket No. 6536PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARCHBALD, J., pro tem.

H. H. Foster and Rena E. Foster, husband and wife, the plaintiffs and respondents, each filed separate complaints in the superior court for damages for alleged malicious prosecution, against the defendant and appellant, Maude Stock Banks. Afterward on stipulation to that effect an order was made consolidating the cases for the purposes of trial, the jury to return one verdict in both cases, one memorandum of costs to be filed, and it was further stipulated and ordered that “in all further proceedings said actions shall be treated as one case”. The actions' so…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Franzen v. ShenkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Burke v. WattsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Diemee v. HerberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Esau Awabdy v. City of Adelanto Scott Burnell Ted Hartz Richard Althouse, Michael Sakamoto, Does I-X, InclusiveCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  2. Singleton v. SingletonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  3. Schubkegel v. GordinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  4. Gordon v. MountCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. Graham v. GriffinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944

6 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