Legal Opinion

Sunset Realty Co. v. Dadmun

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 31, 1939PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

34 Cal.App.2d Supp. 733 (1939)

SUNSET REALTY COMPANY (a Corporation), Respondent,

v.

L. E. DADMUN, Defendant; PERCIVAL E. WOODS, Appellant.

California Court of Appeals.

March 31, 1939.

P. E. Cavaney and L. E. Dadmun for Appellant.

Goodman, Bachrack & Brownstone for Respondent.

Bishop, J.,

The defendant in the action which gives title to the proceeding under review, L. E. Dadmun, appears in two roles: he is a judgment debtor in the municipal court, and a judgment creditor, at least for the time being, in the superior court. The judgment in his favor is for $2,892.75, costs and interest, the balance…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. NakanoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Herrlich v. KaufmannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  3. Anglo-California Trust Co. v. Oakland RailwaysCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  4. Dubois v. SpinksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  5. McBride v. FallonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Roseburg Loggers, Inc. v. U.S. Plywood-Champion Papers, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Division of Labor Law Enforcement, Department of Industrial Relations, State of California v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962
  3. Turner v. DonovanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  4. Nanny v. H. E. Pogue Distillery Co.California Court of Appeal · 1943
  5. Constructora, S. A. v. ShepherdDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1953

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

Powered by the Exa API