Legal Opinion

Dieckmann v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 6, 1985No. B011450PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WOODS, P. J.

By petition for writ of mandate, a plaintiff in a civil action seeks to vacate the granting of a defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. The motion was granted due to the absence, in the original complaint, of an allegation that the true names of the fictitiously named defendants were unknown to plaintiff.

The question of first impression raised is whether the failure to comply with the requirement of section 474 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1 that a plaintiff “must” state in the complaint that the names of fictitiously named defendants are unknown to him, may…

2Cases cited46 opinions

  1. Nga Li v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Select Base Materials, Inc. v. Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Friends of Mammoth v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Desny v. WilderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Austin v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961

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

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Walker v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Fireman's Fund Insurance v. Sparks Construction, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2004
  3. Lorna Kreines v. United States of America, and Jack McMenimen Wayne YamashitaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  4. Joslin v. H.A.S. Insurance BrokerageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
  5. General Motors Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996

34 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