Legal Opinion

Hammond v. McDonald

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 11, 1942No. Civ. 13086Published

1Opinion of the Court

49 Cal.App.2d 671 (1942)

GEORGE Y. HAMMOND, Respondent,

v.

VERNON McDONALD et al., Appellants.

Civ. No. 13086.

California Court of Appeals. Second Dist., Div. One.

Feb. 11, 1942.

Hanna & Morton for Appellants.

Newby & Newby for Respondent.

SHAW, J. pro tem.

This is an action brought by the plaintiff as a citizen and resident of the county of Los Angeles, to abate a nuisance consisting of a place in said county used by the defendants, it is alleged, for the unlawful sale and service of intoxicating liquor. The action purports to be brought under a statute of 1915 (Stats. 1915, p. 236; Deering's General…

Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. People v. OtteyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Carter v. Commission on Qualifications of Judicial AppointmentsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Kaiser v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Wheeler v. HerbertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Crowe v. BoyleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920

25 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