Legal Opinion

Hegard v. California Insurance

California Supreme Court

Decided June 29, 1886No. 11,073PublishedCited by 8 opinions

APPEAL from Superior Court, City and County of San Francisco.

1Opinion of the Court

FOOTE, C.

The respondent, Hegard, makes the point that this cause should be considered here upon the judgment-roll only, for the reason that the notice of intention to move for a new trial on the part of the appellant, although served within the statutory period of ten days, was not so filed. From the statement on motion for a new trial it appears that findings were filed on the fifth day of February, 1885; that the attorneys for Hegard, at all times during the pendency of this action, resided and had their offices at Quincy, Plumas county, state of California, and that the attorney for the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. National Bank v. Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Clark v. Phœnix InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1868
  3. Neely v. NagleeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. People v. ChurchCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  2. American Ins. Co. of Newark, N.J. v. RodenhouseSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  3. Shaffer v. GovreauSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  4. Federoff v. Birks Bros.California Court of Appeal · 1925
  5. Osborne v. Phenix InsuranceUtah Supreme Court · 1901

3 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