Legal Opinion

Stone v. Stone

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 1, 1922No. Civ. No. 2478PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFinch, P. J.

The defendant’s demurrer to the amended complaint was sustained with ten days leave to plaintiff to amend. On plaintiff’s failure to amend within the time allowed, judgment was entered in favor of defendant. From this judgment the plaintiff appeals. The sole question presented is whether the amended complaint states a cause of action.

The complaint alleges that prior to December 17, 1919, the parties were husband and wife; that at the time of the commencement of the action for divorce hereinafter referred to, the parties owned community property “consisting of money in bank and bonds and…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Brown v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  2. De la Montanya v. De la MontanyaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  3. Cohen v. CohenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Lang v. LangCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Staacke v. BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. In Re Gregory Dewitt Cantrell, DebtorCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  2. Parker v. ParkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Helene Marceau Sidebotham v. W. L. Robison, Administrator of the Estate of Robert Sidebotham, Deceased, and Robert Sidebotham and James SidebothamCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
  4. Williams v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Peters v. PetersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936

4 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