Legal Opinion
Fleishbein v. Western Auto Supply Agency
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 4, 1937No. Civ. No. 11271PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCrail, P. J.
The sole question necessary for a decision on this appeal is whether the plaintiff has successfully pleaded an estoppel. If he has, the judgment should be reversed. If he has not it should be affirmed.
The plaintiff originally brought his action in the superior court of the state of California. That action was removed to the federal court. After the period of the statute of limitations had fully run, he dismissed the action without prejudice.
The plaintiff thereafter commenced a new action in the superior court and, because it otherwise would have appeared upon the face of the complaint that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Davis v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Harrison v. Remington Paper Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- Parke v. FranciscusCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Nevitt v. BaconMississippi Supreme Court · 1856
- Arp v. BlakeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Wood v. Elling Corp.California Supreme Court · 1977
- Chavez v. ChenowethNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1976
- Appalachian Insurance v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1989
- Neff v. New York Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Estate of PieperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.