Legal Opinion

Morey v. Paladini

California Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1922No. S. F. No. 9114PublishedCited by 42 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. George H. Cabaniss, ■ Judge. Reversed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

WASTE, J.—This

action is one brought to recover damages for the breach of a contract. Plaintiff had judgment and the defendant has appealed. After final judgment the trial court made an order relieving the defendant from his default, and failure to file the notice and request for transcript required by the provisions of section 953a of the Code of Civil Procedure. The respondent has appealed from that order and has presented the questions thus raised in a motion to dismiss the appeal of the defendant.

[1] The facts germane to the preliminary motion and appeal are: Judgment was entered in favor…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Appts. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  2. Addyston Pipe & Steel Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
  3. McMullen v. HoffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
  4. United States v. E. C. Knight Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895
  5. Bement v. National Harrow Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902

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

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Lewis & Queen v. N. M. Ball SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2020
  3. Fewel & Dawes, Inc. v. PrattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Wallace v. ZinmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Great Western Distillery Products, Inc. v. John A. Wathen Distillery Co.California Supreme Court · 1937

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

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

Powered by the Exa API