Legal Opinion

Rudy v. Slotwinsky

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 30, 1925No. Docket No. 5114PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TYLER, P. J.—This

is an appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiffs granting a permanent injunction against defendant from proceeding to enforce a certain judgment and setting aside and canceling the same.

The complaint alleges that defendant herein on April 17, 1920, commenced an action against the above-named plaintiffs R. L. Rudy and E: D. Hopper and one Garbini, as directors and incorporators of Chateau Bellevue Vineyard Company, a defunct corporation, and that on May 21, 1920, Rudy and Hopper demurred to the complaint, which demurrer was sustained. That an amended complaint was filed on…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pico v. CohnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Borland v. ThorntonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
  3. Eisenmayer v. ThompsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Steen v. MarchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Kulchar v. KulcharCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Kulchar v. KulcharCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Cadenasso v. Bank of ItalyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  4. DeMello v. SouzaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
  5. Wilson v. WilsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942

8 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