Legal Opinion

In Re Strand

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 29, 1932No. Docket No. 1658PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.

Petitioner was adjudged guilty of contempt for refusing to answer the questions propounded upon the taking of her deposition and was remanded to custody until she answered said questions. She seeks her release on habeas corpus.

The action in which the defendant sought to take petitioner’s deposition was brought by Peder Strand and petitioner Paula Strand, his wife, as plaintiffs against the Market Street Railway Company as defendant. In that action the plaintiffs sought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by petitioner as the result of the alleged negligence of the defendant.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Tobias v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  2. Rothschild v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  3. Schwartz v. BrandonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Franklin v. FranklinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  2. People v. PeakCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  3. Scoville v. KeglorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  4. Frost v. MighettoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  5. Young v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961

8 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