Legal Opinion
Weiner v. Luscombe
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 22, 1937No. Civ. No. 10459PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.
In an action to quiet title the trial court made findings of fact in favor of the plaintiffs and from the judgment entered Helen C. O’Connor, one of the defendants, has appealed.
*670Mrs. O’Connor states that heretofore Mr. and Mrs. Weiner were indebted to her in the sum of $700; that she employed D. Herndon, another of the defendants, to act as her attorney; and that he induced her to assign her claim to L. S. Luscombe, his secretary, another defendant, solely for collection. She also claims that the suit was brought in the municipal court of San Francisco in the name of Miss Luscombe, that the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Preston v. HillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1875
- Firth v. RichterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Elam v. ArzagaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Sun-Maid Raisin Growers v. PapazianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
3Cited by8 opinions
- Grupe v. GlickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
- Harrison v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Navrides v. Zurich InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Whittier Union High School District v. Superior Court of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Rauer's Law & Collection Co. v. HigginsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.