Legal Opinion
Mills v. Dickson
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 20, 1933No. Docket No. 4791PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPullen, P. J.
This is an appeal from an order denying a motion for a change of place of trial from the county of Sonoma to the city and county of San Francisco. The motion is made upon the ground that San Francisco is the residence of the defendants. The order is sought to be upheld upon the ground that the action is one for personal injuries caused by alleged negligence in the extraction of a tooth, and that the injury occurred in the county of Sonoma.
Section 395 of the Code of Civil Procedure. “ . . . the action must be in the county in which the defendants or some of them reside ... or if it be an…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Brady v. Times-Mirror Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
- Lakeside Ditch Co. v. Packwood Canal Co.California Court of Appeal · 1920
- Gridley v. FellowsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Loehr v. LathamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Bachman v. CathryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ward Manufacturing Co. v. MileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- Turner v. SimpsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Kiku Saito v. Policy Holders L. Ins. Assn.California Court of Appeal · 1933
- Gaskill v. Richmaid Ice Cream Co.California Court of Appeal · 1952
- Hall v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963