Legal Opinion
Aronow v. LaCroix
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 24, 1990No. A025056PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HOLMDAHL, J. *
The trial court found for plaintiff in a malicious prosecution trial, and awarded damages and costs. Defendants appeal the judgment.
The judgment is reversed and the trial court is directed to enter judgment for appellants.
Facts
LaCroix and Schumb became associated in the practice of law in 1964. In June, 1966, Schumb referred Roscoe Bailey to LaCroix in connection with a possible claim by Bailey against Joseph Fitzsimmons, M.D. (Dr. Joseph), Ann Fitzsimmons, M.D. (Dr. Ann), and Jerome Lackner, M.D., for medical malpractice. On June 29, 1967, LaCroix filed a medical…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- People v. WatsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
- Bernhard v. Bank of America National Trust & Saving AssociationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Bertero v. National General Corp.California Supreme Court · 1974
- Clemmer v. Hartford Insurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1978
- Sheldon Appel Co. v. Albert & OlikerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Citizens for Open Access to Sand and Tide, Inc. v. Seadrift Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Vega v. Jones, Day, Reavis & PogueCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Rodgers v. Sargent Controls & AerospaceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- Martin v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Caperton v. AT Massey Coal Co., Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 2008
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.