Legal Opinion
Sachs v. Killeen
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 17, 1958No. Civ. 23183PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PATROSSO, J. pro tem. *
This is an appeal from an order appointing a receiver ex parte and from an order confirming the appointment and continuing it pendente lite. The action is against Albert E. Killeen, Jack R. Killeen, individually, and also as copartners doing business under the name of Killeen and Son Production Engineering Company, and Herbert C. Manuel, a bookkeeper employed by the Killeens. The action is for an accounting and damages for fraud. It was alleged in the complaint that on October 1, 1951, Sachs and Killeen and Son (hereinafter called Killeen), entered into a written…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- San Pedro Lumber Co. v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- Davies v. RamsdellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Armbrust v. ArmbrustCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Moore v. ObergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Fox v. FloodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Associated Creditors' Agency v. WongCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Kennard v. GlickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Maggiora v. Palo Alto Inn, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1967
- Santacroce Bros. v. Edgewater-Santa Clara, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1966
- Koenig v. Centralia Limited InvestorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2025
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.