Legal Opinion

Mortensen v. Los Angeles Examiner

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 25, 1931No. Docket No. 4252PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MR. JUSTICE PLUMMER Delivered the Opinion of the Court.

The above-entitled actions are based upon the same publications made by the defendant, involve precisely the same points, are presented to us upon this appeal on one set of briefs, and are considered as one case. For convenience, however, we shall follow the procedure adopted in the briefs and consider by name only the case of Lucille Mortensen v. The Los Angeles Examiner, a Corporaiion, it being understood, however, that whatever is said as to this case applies equally to the case of Athalie Richardson v. The Los Angeles Examiner.

At the…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Davis v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Snively v. Record Publishing Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Kleinclaus v. DutardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Philbrook v. RandallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  5. Chavez v. Times-Mirror Co.California Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Lipman v. Brisbane Elementary School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Emde v. San Joaquin County Central Labor CouncilCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Glenn v. GibsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  4. Kurata v. Los Angeles News Publishing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1935
  5. Peabody v. BarhamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942

14 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