Hill v. Wrather
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
KINCAID, J. pro tem. *
tern.* — Defendants - appellants appeal from the judgment rendered in favor of plaintiff-respondent, based upon a promissory note in the amount of $75,000, interest and attorney fees, on the grounds that the trial court committed prejudicial error in (1) granting plaintiff’s motion to strike the cross-complaint; (2) in granting plaintiff’s motion to strike portions of the first amended answer; and (3) in denying defendants’ motion for leave to join as a cross-defendant the new party, Maria Helen Alvarez.
For convenience, the defendants-appellants will hereinafter be…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Bagdasarian v. GragnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Sjoberg v. HastorfCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- The Edward Barron Estate Co. v. the Woodruff Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
- Orloff v. Metropolitan Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1941
- Alpers v. BlissCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- OCM Principal Opportunities Fund, L.P. v. CIBC World Markets Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2007
- Gold v. Los Angeles Democratic LeagueCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- Okun v. MortonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Service by Medallion, Inc. v. Clorox Co.California Court of Appeal · 1996
- Lane v. DavisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.