Legal Opinion
Belli v. Roberts Brothers Furs
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 21, 1966No. Civ. 22637PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSalsman, J.
This is an appeal from a summary judgment granted in respondent’s favor, on the ground that the statute of limitations (Code Civ. Proe., § 340, subd. 3) barred appellants’ alleged causes of action. We conclude that the trial court was correct in its ruling, and therefore affirm the judgment.
Appellants filed their complaint on February 14, 1963. They alleged that, on February 14, 1962, “. . . defendants . . . wrongfully . . . did cause to be published a certain statement concerning plaintiffs, to-wit: Plaintiff, Melvin M. Belli, had refused to pay for a certain fur stole allegedly purchased…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hartmann v. Time, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1948
- De Vries v. BrumbackCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- Hazlitt v. Fawcett Publications, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1953
- Schessler v. KeckCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- McGlue v. Weekly Publications, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1946
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Charles Yeager v. Connie BowlinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Shively v. BozanichCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Wilbanks v. WolkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- TRADITIONAL CAT ASS'N., INC. v. GilbreathCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Fleury v. Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.