Legal Opinion
Hall v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
Decided October 28, 1955No. L. A. 23450PublishedCited by 49 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
— Peirson M. Hall appealed “from that part of an interlocutory decree which ordered him to pay alimony and the fees of Mrs. Hall’s attorneys.” This court ordered that ‘1 [i] nsofar as the judgment awards Mrs. Hall $350 per *380month for support and maintenance, it is reversed; in all other respects it is affirmed.” (Hall v. Hall, 42 Cal.2d 435, 436, 442 [267 P.2d 249].)
On the same day that the remittitur was filed, upon the ex parte application of Hall, a final judgment of divorce was granted, incorporating by reference the provisions of the interlocutory decree. Mrs. Hall attempted…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Sharon v. SharonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Bowman v. BowmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Meyer v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Puckett v. PuckettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Dexter v. DexterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by49 opinions
- Fassberg Construction Co. v. Housing AuthorityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- In Re Marriage of RosanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- People v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
- Lovret v. SeyfarthCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- People Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. LagissCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.