Legal Opinion

Sturdevant v. Sturdevant

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 31, 1934No. Civ. 8893PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILLIS, J., pro tem.

By a statement of facts in ordinary and concise language, appellant in her complaint herein stated a cause of action for recovery from respondent of the sum of $2,986.86 on a subsisting and unsatisfied judgment entered in favor of appellant and against respondent by a Nebraska state court on July 1, 1925, for separate maintenance payable in monthly installments indefinitely. In his answer respondent admitted the making and entry of the judgment but denied that it was valid, subsisting and enforceable against him in Nebraska, as alleged in the complaint ; admits that he…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In Re Estate of PendellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Stice v. SticeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  2. Kaiser v. MansfieldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  3. Bertrand v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
  4. Cecchini v. RidingerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API