Legal Opinion

Barr v. Hall

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 9, 1935No. Civ. 1390PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

The respondent has moved to dismiss this appeal or affirm the judgment on the grounds that the appeal was taken for delay only and that the questions presented are so unsubstantial as not to need further argument.

In the opening brief it is urged that the giving and refusal of certain instructions was erroneous in view of the evidence which had been presented. It is at once apparent that it will be necessary to examine the entire record, including the evidence. The opening brief raises at least one substantial question in the decision of which the court should have the assistance of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Brown v. GowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  2. Lennon v. WoodburyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hall v. WolfordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  2. Rasmussen v. Fresno Traction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1936
  3. Birkhofer v. KrummCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  4. County of Riverside v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  5. Kelly v. LiddicoatCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939

1 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