Legal Opinion

Lee v. Hensley

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 23, 1951No. Civ. 4093PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GRIFFIN, J.—

This appeal comes to us on the judgment roll alone, consisting of a second amended complaint, a general and special demurrer thereto, and a judgment of dismissal predicated upon an order sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend.

The main question is the sufficiency of the complaint, as amended, to constitute a cause of action. It alleges generally that plaintiff is an Indian member of the Cherokee Indian Nation; that William J. Hensley, hereinafter referred to as defendant, a white man, married plaintiff’s mother, Daisy Lee Hensley; that plaintiff lived with them but was not…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Wennerholm v. Stanford University School of MedicineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Lady Washington Consolidated Co. v. WoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Sears v. RuleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Neet v. HolmesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944

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

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. Flores v. ArroyoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Schaefer v. BerinsteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  3. Diodes, Inc. v. FranzenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  4. Vallejo Development Co. v. Beck Development Co.California Court of Appeal · 1994
  5. Ramey v. General Petroleum Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1959

41 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