Legal Opinion

Bailey v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 31, 1956No. Civ. 8875PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, P. J.

This is a proceeding in certiorari to review an order made in a contempt proceeding arising out of violations of an injunctive decree theretofore made in a civil action. The civil action was brought in respondent court by Joseph S. and Avesta Ball, husband and wife, as plaintiffs, against Robert J. and Alberta Bailey, husband and wife, as defendants. Plaintiffs in the civil action are the real parties in interest here, and for convenience will be referred to as “real parties.” We shall call the Baileys “petitioners.” By the complaint in the civil action it was alleged and the answer admitted…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Hotaling v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Ex parte Ah MenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Freeman v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  4. H. J. Heinz Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Ex parte AmbroseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Bisno v. SaxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  2. Graham v. GrahamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  3. Harrigan v. Mason & Winograd, Inc.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1979
  4. American Fire Protection Service v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Gibson v. GibsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971

14 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