Legal Opinion

Nicholls v. Anders

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 25, 1936No. Civ. 10374PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DESMOND, J., pro tem.

Appeal from an order vacating a judgment rendered after a default, and quashing writ of execution which had been issued thereon. The complaint in this action was filed May 4, 1934, and was entitled, “H. O. Nicholls, Plaintiff, v. Carl D. Anders, A. V. Spencer, and the Partnership Consisting of Carl D. Anders and A. V. Spencer, Defendants.” The individuals, Anders and Spencer, defended the action successfully in a jury trial, judgment in their favor being entered February 20, 1935. Meanwhile, on June 22, 1934, plaintiff had secured entry of a judgment after default…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Bailey v. TaaffeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  2. Waite v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Jergins v. SchenckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Madison v. Octave Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Minehan v. SilveriaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Kooper v. KingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  2. Beckley v. Reclamation BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Batchelor v. FinnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. Plott v. YorkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  5. Adams Manufacturing & Engineering Co. v. Coast Centerless Grinding Co.California Court of Appeal · 1960

9 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