Legal Opinion
Floyd J. Harkness Co. v. Amezcua
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 30, 1976No. Civ. 2587PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BROWN (G. A.), P. J.
Plaintiff, a California corporation with principal place of business in Fresno County, appeals from an order granting the motion of defendant Eduardo Amezcua to quash service of summons on the defendant. The summons was served on defendant in the country of Mexico.
The essential facts are not in substantial dispute. Any conflicts that may exist, however, are resolved in favor of the prevailing party and the trial court’s order. (Tiffany Records, Inc. v. M. B. Krupp Distributors, Inc. (1969) 276 Cal.App.2d 610, 615 [81 Cal.Rptr. 320].)
From the affidavits filed in…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- McGee v. International Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Buckeye Boiler Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Cornelison v. ChaneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- James E. Peterson v. Harold Kennedy, Richard A. Berthelsen, and National Football League Players AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Roth v. Garcia MarquezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Thos. P. Gonzalez Corporation v. Consejo Nacional De Produccion De Costa Rica, and Sergio Quiros MarotoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
- Pacific Atlantic Trading Co. v. The M/V Main ExpressCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Secrest MacHine Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.