Legal Opinion

Palmer v. Holcomb

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 19, 1956No. Civ. 5272PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COUGHLIN, J. pro tem. *

In December, 1952, the plaintiff, who then was a party to a divorce action, employed the defendant Holcomb, a private detective, to investigate the activities and financial affairs of her husband. Holcomb had been suggested by Millard M. Mier, her attorney in the divorce action.

During the ensuing 13 months, Holcomb, in the course of his employment, made two trips to San Diego, one to Crest-line, and one to Tosemite Valley, following plaintiff’s husband, ran down and checked out numerous rumors and false clues submitted by Mrs. Palmer; obtained recordings of her…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Bancroft-Whitney Co. v. McHughCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Estate of WunderleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Thomas v. Hunt Manufacturing Corp.California Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Johnson v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Soberanes v. SoberanesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Brooks v. DuskinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  2. Doran v. Supreme CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  3. Freitas v. City of AtwaterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  4. Cabana Nutria, Inc. v. The Way, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1958
  5. Lewis v. Southern California Edison Co.California Court of Appeal · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API