Legal Opinion
City of Los Angeles v. Knapp
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 28, 1937No. Civ. 11457PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMcCOMB, J.
This is an appeal from an order denying appellant’s motion to require the clerk of the superior court to pay appellant $875 on deposit in an interpleader suit entitled City of Los Angeles v. Knapp.
The material facts are these:
Appellant through mesne assignments became entitled to the sum of $875, which sum had been previously assigned to W. W. Middleeoff for attorneys’ fees in a condemnation action and deposited with respondent clerk in an interpleader action entitled City of Los Angeles v. Knapp. In this latter action our Supreme Court decided that appellant was entitled to the aforesaid…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Dunsmoor v. FurstenfeldtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Weiner v. LuscombeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
- Youtz v. Farmers & Merchants' Natl. BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
- Tomlinson v. LamptonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
3Cited by7 opinions
- Dwight A. Ward v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Hanna P. Ward v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
- Credit Bureau of San Diego, Inc. v. GettyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Saper v. LongDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1954
- Welch v. Fiber Glass Engineering, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
- Osgood v. HoffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.