Legal Opinion

Kirsch v. Barnes

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided February 3, 1959No. 15891PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORR, Circuit Judge.

An original complaint filed in the district court was held not to state a cause of action. An amended complaint was also held defective in that respect.

In this opinion we do not reach a consideration of the trial court’s ruling as to the failure to plead a cause of action for the reason that we find that the action was not seasonably filed.

It is alleged in the amended complaint that prior to October 16, 1952, appellee Barnes acted in a confidential capacity in representing appellant in arranging sales of standing timber belonging to appellant and located in California; that…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bennett v. Hibernia BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Gudger v. MantonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Coley v. HeckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Italiani v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1941
  5. Wood v. CurreyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Idaho Norland Corp. v. Caelter Industries, Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 1981
  2. Kirsch v. BarnesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1959

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API