Legal Opinion
De Bock v. De Bock
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 17, 1919No. Civ. No. 1896PublishedCited by 9 opinions
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County. Charles 0. Busicb, Judge. Reversed in part; affirmed in part. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] We adopt the following portion of our opinion on the former hearing of this cause:
"The appeal is prosecuted by defendants, under the alternative method, from a judgment against them in the sum of five thousand dollars.
"It is stated in appellants' opening brief that the action was brought 'to recover damages from defendants, for enticing, inducing and persuading plaintiff's husband to desert and abandon her,' while respondent maintains that the cause of action is…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- People v. LawrenceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Clemens v. ClemensWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- Warfield v. LindellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
- Humphrey v. PopeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Humphrey v. PopeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1905
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Ballos v. NaturalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- In Re Estate of SmeadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- McNeil v. DowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- McAuliff v. McFaddenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Johnston v. DebockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.