Legal Opinion

Bustamante v. Haet

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 19, 1963No. Civ. 20697PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAgee, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment entered upon the sustaining of defendant’s demurrer to her third amended complaint without leave to amend. The action is one for damages for alleged malpractice by defendant as an attorney at law. It was commenced on June 23, 1961. The determinative issue is whether the action is barred by the statute of limitations.

The third amended complaint alleges in part as follows: that appellant and one Sergio Hernandez were betrothed; that Hernandez was being deported from the United States by the immigration authorities; that on August 5, 1954, appellant employed…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Lucas v. HammCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Wennerholm v. Stanford University School of MedicineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Flores v. ArroyoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Lamoreux v. San Diego & Arizona Eastern Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Hurlimann v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Neel v. Magana, Olney, Levy, Cathcart & GelfandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  2. United States Liability Insurance v. Haidinger-Hayes, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Heyer v. FlaigCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  4. Twomey v. Mitchum, Jones & Templeton, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1968
  5. Howe v. Pioneer Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1968

12 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