Legal Opinion

Rosenfield v. Vosper

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 11, 1943No. Civ. No. 13613PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHAW, J. pro tem.

On a former appeal by defendants in this action a judgment in favor of plaintiff was reversed and the defendants were awarded their costs on appeal, the sole ground of reversal being misconduct of the trial judge. (Rosenfield v. Vosper, (1941) 45 Cal.App.2d 365 [114 P.2d 29].) Thereafter defendants filed their verified memorandum of costs in the sum of $1,961.90, plaintiff made a motion to strike this memorandum and to tax costs, and the trial court made an order taxing and allowing costs in the sum of $1,932.30, from which this appeal is taken by plaintiff.

Plaintiff’s first…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Rosenfield v. VosperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  2. Purdy v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  3. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Daniel v. DanielWashington Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Monson v. FischerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Pratt v. Robert S. Odell & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1944
  2. Rosenfield v. VosperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  3. Muller v. ReaghCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. Harmon v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co.California Court of Appeal · 1962
  5. Wilson v. SharpCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959

3 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