Legal Opinion
Muller v. Muller
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 19, 1959No. Civ. 18390PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
On a prior appeal herein, because of the inadequacy of the record, it was ordered augmented to include some additional pleadings. (Muller v. Muller, 156 Cal.App.2d 623 [320 P.2d 205].) Because of plaintiff-appellant’s bitter complaints at the time, the burden of augmentation as ordered by the court was placed upon the respondent.
Successful on the prior appeal, defendant-respondent was awarded her costs. Thereupon she filed her cost bill in the sum of $8.50, consisting of the sum of $8.00 paid to the county clerk of San Mateo County for certifying and comparing the aforementioned…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Muller v. MullerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- Muller v. ReaghCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Muller v. RobinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Muller v. ReaghCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Muller v. ReaghCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Nelson v. GauntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- City & County of San Francisco v. MullerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Leslie v. Board of Medical Quality AssuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Estate of MullerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- Muller v. HallenbeckCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.