Legal Opinion

Gollard v. Bayless

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 29, 1959No. Civ. 24038PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHEA, J. pro tem. *

Plaintiff recovered judgment in the trial court and defendants have appealed. Plaintiff now moves this court to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the judgment appealed from is interlocutory and not final and therefore is not appealable.

The findings of fact and conclusions of law generally declare that the defendants are trustees of certain property and that the plaintiff has a beneficial interest in such property and the rents, issues and profits thereof, and further that the plaintiff is entitled to an accounting of the trust estate.

The judgment is entitled…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Lyon v. GossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Gunder v. GunderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Middleton v. FinneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Bakewell v. BakewellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Oak Grove School District v. City Title InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  2. Associated Convalescent Enterprises v. Carl Marks & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1973
  3. Kinoshita v. HorioCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
  4. Samuels v. SabihCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  5. Barendregt v. DowningCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959

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