Raisch v. Warren
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco refusing to dissolve and vacate an order of injunction. James M. Troutt, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
Injunction. Upon filing the complaint and executing a bond for $1,000, the court granted the prayer of the complaint for an injunction, further ordering that defendants show cause at a date named “why this order should not be continued in force until the further order of the court in the premises.” Before the hearing thus ordered, defendant, Charles A. Warren, Jr., served and filed his motion to dissolve and vacate said order of injunction, based on the complaint in said action and upon the ground that “said complaint does not state or show that any ground or cause exists or has existed for…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Case v. BeauregardSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Smith v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Watson v. SutroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Herrlich v. KaufmannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Ohm v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Minifie v. RowleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Heckmann v. AhmansonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- Swanson v. SiemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Kendall v. FoulksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Dunn v. Traders & General Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1956
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.