Legal Opinion
Pruitt v. Fontana
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 6, 1956No. Civ. 21496PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.
Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment dismissing the action. The appeal has also been taken from orders striking their fourth amended complaint and denying their motion to permit the filing of such pleading.
On March 24, 1955, after demurrers to his original complaint and two amended pleadings had been sustained, plaintiff C. D. Pruitt filed his third amended complaint for damages for breach of contract comprising two causes of action. On April 14, 1955, a demurrer to this pleading was sustained and plaintiff was allowed 10 days to amend. On May 3, 1955, subsequent to the 10 days’ leave period, a…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Seymour v. OelrichsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Klopstock v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Monarco v. Lo GrecoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Stowe v. Fritzie Hotels, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1955
- Ellis v. KlaffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Mattei v. HopperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Kadner v. ShieldsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
- Thomas v. BruzaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Carlson v. RichardsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Veigh Cummings v. Larry R. BullockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1966
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.