Legal Opinion

Hilton v. Curry

California Supreme Court

Decided March 22, 1899No. S. F. No. 1122PublishedCited by 10 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. J. C. B. Hebbard, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.

The plaintiff was summoned to attend as a trial juror before the superior court of San Francisco, Department No. 3 thereof, and in obedience thereto appeared and attended as such trial juror upon twenty days in the months of March and April, 1897, exclusive of days upon which he actually served as a juror in the trial of causes therein. During all this time this department of the superior court tried only civil cases. Thereafter he demanded from the defendant,who was the county clerk and ex officio clerk of said superior court, a certificate stating that he had so attended and was entitled to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Dwyer v. ParkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Carpenter v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Miller v. CurryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Bank of British N. A v. CahnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Mason v. CulbertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. People v. FitzgeraldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  2. Matter of Petition of JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Traber v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Birch v. PhelanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Jackson v. BaehrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903

5 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