Fidelity Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Rodgers
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
This action was begun by the filing of the complaint of the plaintiff asking that the defendants be required to interplead and litigate among themselves their several adverse and conflicting claims to the sum of three thousand five hundred dollars in possession of the plaintiff and which it offered to pay into court for the party found to be entitled thereto. Such an action is authorized by section 386 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
[1] The objection of the appellant, Rodgers, that the complaint in interpleader is insufficient, because it does not state facts showing that the claims of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Pierce v. RobinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Pullen v. Placer Country BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Wheatley v. StrobeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
- Cashman v. HarrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Curtner v. LyndonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Guggenhime & Co. v. LamantiaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Hancock Oil Co. v. HopkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. HenesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Zavala v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In Re Zavala)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. California · 2011
- Westamerica Bank v. City of BerkeleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.