Legal Opinion

Rosefield v. Rosefield

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 22, 1963No. Civ. 20750PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDevine, J.

General demurrer, on the ground that no cause of action was stated, was sustained with leave to amend, but plaintiffs declined to amend. Judgment for defendant Marvin Bosefield was entered, and plaintiffs appeal. The complaint, by Kelly Bosefield, a minor, by her guardian ad litem and by Manon Bosefield, her mother, is directed against Marvin Bosefield, the child’s grandfather who is the mother’s father-in-law, and also against Robin Bosefield, the child’s father and the husband of the other plaintiff. The latter has not been served with process and has not appeared. The sole respondent is…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Emery v. EmeryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Klein v. KleinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Self v. SelfCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Rudley v. TobiasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  5. Conolley v. PowerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Borer v. American Airlines, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Kessel v. LeavittWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Baxter v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Silcott v. OglesbyTexas Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Marshak v. MarshakSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993

31 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