Legal Opinion

Vidal v. Backs

California Supreme Court

Decided May 1, 1933No. Docket No. S.F. 14881PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.

A judgment of foreclosure and sale was rendered by the Superior Court of Orange County on the eighth day of March, 1933, in favor of the petitioner herein. The respondent County Clerk has refused to issue a writ on the judgment and it is sought by this proceeding to compel him so to do. The sole contention of respondent is that the judgment was rendered on a nonjudicial day and for that reason is void. The question arises by virtue of the proclamation of the President of the United States declaring certain bank holidays and our statutes respecting judicial work which may be done on general or…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Whitney v. BlackburnOregon Supreme Court · 1889
  2. St. Louis, B. & M. Ry. Co. v. HicksCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913
  3. Didsbury v. Van TasselNew York Supreme Court · 1890
  4. State v. SheltonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1906
  5. Langabier v. Fairbury, Pontiac & Northwestern R. R. Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1872

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. California School Employees Ass'n. v. Governing Board of the Marine Community College DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Hogya v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  3. Mandel v. HodgesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  4. Joaquin Alonzo v. Acf Property Management, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
  5. Laubisch v. RoberdoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954

9 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