Legal Opinion
Williams v. Gilmore
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 4, 1942No. Civ. 6691PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DEIRUP, J. pro tem.
The defendant Chas. L. Gilmore has appealed from an interlocutory decree permitting the plaintiffs to deposit certain moneys in court and requiring the defendants to litigate their respective rights to the fund and discharging the plaintiffs from all liability to either of the defendants. The action was brought pursuant to the provisions of section 386 of the Code of Civil Procedure and is the kind of action that is known as an interpleader suit. The part of the section which is applicable reads as follows:
“And whenever conflicting claims are or may be made upon a person…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. NakanoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Union Mutual Life Insurance v. BroderickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Conner v. Bank of BakersfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Jax Ice & Cold Storage Co. v. South Florida Farms Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1926
- Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. HenesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bank of China v. Wells Fargo Bank & Union Trust Co. (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
- DIAL 800 v. FesbinderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Shopoff & Cavallo LLP v. HyonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- City of Morgan Hill v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Hancock Oil Co. v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.