Legal Opinion
Harden v. Skinner & Hammond
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 15, 1955No. Civ. 16166PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, P. J.
On the grounds of the convenience of witnesses and that the ends of justice would be promoted by the change, plaintiff John Harden, Jr., moved for a change of venue from San Francisco to Santa Clara County. The trial court, granted the motion. Defendants, Skinner and Hammond et al., appeal. The sole question presented is whether the trial court abused its discretion in granting the motion.
By his first amended complaint respondent sought an accounting after dissolution of a claimed partnership. So far as pertinent here, it is therein alleged that by oral agreement respondent entered into a…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Wrin v. OhlandtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Gordon v. PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Swanson v. SiemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- San Jose Hospital v. EthertonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Wood v. SilversCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Peiser v. MettlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Flanagan v. FlanaganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Pearson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- J. C. Millett Co. v. Latchford-Marble Glass Co.California Court of Appeal · 1959
- Corfee v. Southern California Edison Co.California Court of Appeal · 1962
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.