Legal Opinion
Richion v. Mahoney
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 6, 1976No. Civ. 47804PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HANSON, J.
Charles Wm. Richion and eight other individuals (hereinafter referred to collectively as Richion), cross-complainants and interveners in the original action between Windsor Sales, a partnership formed by Richard and Robert Mahoney (the parties hereinafter referred to collectively as the Mahoneys) and defendants New Life Management, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as New Life) and Union Bank (hereinafter referred to as Bank), appeal from orders of the trial court awarding payment of the funds in dispute to the Mahoneys.
The instant appeal arises out of the conflicting claims of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Henry v. General Forming, Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1948
- Blair v. MahonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Bank of South San Francisco v. PikeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Kyoko Nishi v. DowningCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
3Cited by6 opinions
- Texaco, Inc. v. PonsoldtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Siegel v. Boston (In Re Sale Guaranty Corp.)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Blalak v. Mid Valley Transportation, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
- 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5397, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 8728 Texaco, Inc., and Hatch & Parent, Intervenor, and Imar Arabians, Inc., Intervenor-Appellant v. William R. Ponsoldt Jerry D. Vanier Laurence D. Strick National Trust and Guarantee Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Blalak v. Mid Valley Transportation, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.