Legal Opinion

Bell v. Haun

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 15, 1908No. Civ. No. 483PublishedCited by 3 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a motion to vacate a default and judgment on default. Chas. Monroe, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

Appeal from judgment on default and from order denying motion to vacate and set aside such default and judgment.

The action purports to be for the forcible entry and detainer of premises at the time occupied by plaintiff. It is alleged that defendants "did wrongfully and unlawfully, and without the consent of plaintiff, turn the plaintiff out of the possession thereof by force and violence, and did throw the personal property of plaintiff then on said premises into the public road”; and that by reason thereof plaintiff is damaged in the sum of $500, and will continue to be damaged in the sum…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hildreth v. Montecito Creek Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
  2. McIntyre v. HauserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Callahan v. LoughranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Armstrong v. HendrickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
  5. Castro v. TewksburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Vega v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.District Court, E.D. California · 2009
  2. Grace v. CroningerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
  3. Davies v. StarkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1914

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API