Whitehead v. Sweet
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
COOPER, C.
—This is an appeal from the judgment and comes here on the judgment-roll. It is not claimed that the findings are not supported bjr the evidence, hut it is sought by this appeal to review the order of the court overruling the defendants’ demurrer to the amended complaint. As the court found all the allegations of the complaint to be true, it will be necessary to state the substance of the complaint in order to make clear the points urged on this appeal. It appears from the complaint in substance that the defendant, “Sweet’s Metal Cross Tie Company,” was at all times mentioned a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Brinkerhoff v. BrownNew York Court of Chancery · 1822
- Wickersham v. CrittendenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Watson v. SutroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Wilson v. CastroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- White v. LyonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- McDougald v. HuletCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- DeGarmo v. GoldmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Difani v. Riverside County Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1927
- Russell v. RammCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Becker v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Cty.California Supreme Court · 1907
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.