Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. City of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 26, 1966No. Civ. 28838; Civ. 28839; Civ. 28840PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHerndon, J.

The various plaintiffs have appealed from judgments entered in three separate eases consolidated for trial. Defendants have also appealed from a portion of the judgment relating to the allowance of interest. Since joint briefs have been filed herein and the issues presented for our consideration are common to all three cases, no purpose would be served by our delineating in detail the particular parties hereto. It is sufficient to state that each of the plaintiffs is either a retired member of the Los Angeles Fire or Police Department or the widow of a former member of one of such departments.

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Cole v. RushCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Abbott v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Benson v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Packer v. Board of RetirementCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  5. In Re Estate of HubbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kawasho International, U.S.A., Inc. v. Lakewood Pipe Service, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1983
  2. Myers v. Fire & Police Pension SystemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
  3. Maillet v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API