Legal Opinion

Mowry v. Weisenborn

California Supreme Court

Decided August 5, 1902No. S.F. No. 2253PublishedCited by 19 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order dis-' missing the action on the ground that plaintiff has not used due diligence in its prosecution. The action was brought in the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco. The facts appearing by the record are as follows: The complaint was filed April 19, 1890; two demurrers thereto were served May 16, 1890, and filed May 21, 1890. On June 27, 1896, defendants served a motion to dismiss, which was filed June 29, 1896; the motion was noticed for hearing July 3, 1896; accompanying the motion was the affidavit of defend ants’ attorney…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Stone v. JefferdsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. First National Bank v. NasonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Kubli v. HawkettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  4. San Jose Land & Water Co. v. San Jose Ranch Co.California Supreme Court · 1900

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Romero v. SnyderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Raggio v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Gray v. Times-Mirror Co.California Court of Appeal · 1909
  4. Oberkotter v. SpreckelsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
  5. Witter v. PhelpsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912

14 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