Bloom v. Waxman
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtMcCOMB, J.
May 17, 1937, plaintiff filed an action for declaratory relief in the superior court. September 2, 1937, Andre Witier was permitted to file a complaint in interven tion. June 29, 1939, judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff in intervention against plaintiff Bloom and others. Plaintiff urges that the judgment should be reversed for the reason that the plaintiff in intervention (respondent) had no right to intervene in the action.
This is the sole question necessary for us to determine:
In the absence of an objection to the filing of a complaint in intervention, either by demurrer,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People ex rel. Attorney-General v. ReisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Smith v. PennyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- County of Yuba v. Adams & Co.California Supreme Court · 1857
- McKenty v. Gladwin, Hugg & Co.California Supreme Court · 1858
- Carlin v. MastenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
3Cited by4 opinions
- El Rio Oils Ltd. v. Pacific Coast Asphalt Co.California Court of Appeal · 1949
- Berkeley Lawn Bowling Club v. City of BerkeleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- Watson v. CollinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- Traweek v. DraperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956