Legal Opinion
Maxwell v. Perkins
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 19, 1953No. Civ. 18891PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.
Defendants’ motions for a change of venue were granted. The court thereafter purported to vacate these orders and to deny said motions. Defendants appeal.
Plaintiffs’ intestate brought an action in the county of Los Angeles naming as defendants Reta E. Perkins and her husband, Irving C. Perkins, and a couple named Lindsay. The complaint, which was in two counts, did not designate the place of residence of any of the defendants.
Defendants Reta and Irving Perldns filed separate demurrers and notices of motion for change of venue to Santa Clara County, with affidavits stating that they were…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Holtum v. GriefCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Stevens v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- Drinkhouse v. Van NessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Burnett v. BurnettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Scholle v. FinnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Yarrow v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- Martino v. Concord Community Hospital DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- People v. SchultzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Rodríguez v. Tribunal SuperiorSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1974
- Stearns v. Los Angeles City School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.