Legal Opinion

Cahill v. Goecke

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 20, 1935No. Civ. 5442PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPlummer, J.

At the conclusion of the trial of the above-named action the court made its findings of fact No. Ill, which reads as follows:

‘1 That the said sum of One Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty-nine and 28/100 Dollars ($1,769.28), now on deposit with L. E. Lampton, County Clerk of Los Angeles County, California, belongs to, and is the property of, plaintiff, Mary Elizabeth Cahill, and should be paid to the said plaintiff, Mary Elizabeth Cahill.”

Judgment was thereupon entered in favor of the plaintiff, from which judgment the defendant appeals.

The money mentioned in the finding and judgment is the value…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. McClenahan v. KeyesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Leyson v. DavisMontana Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Talbot v. TalbotSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1911
  4. Kinley v. LargentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Deacon v. BryansCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Lohman v. LohmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  2. White v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  3. Lucy v. LucyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  4. Duggan v. HopkinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  5. Lohman v. LohmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946

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

Powered by the Exa API