Legal Opinion

Overaa v. Keeney

California Supreme Court

Decided March 18, 1915No. L.A. No. 3444PublishedCited by 9 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of dismissal of the action based upon hds failure to proceed therein and want of prosecution thereof.

The action was "one brought to recover damages for personal injuries which plaintiff alleged that he had received while in the employ of the defendant and acting under his orders. The date of the accident as pleaded was January 21, 1909. The complaint was "filed January 10, 1910, eleven days before the expiration of the period of limitation prescribed by subdivision 3 of section 340 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Summons was taken out December 30, 1910,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Johnston v. BakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  2. People Ex Rel. Stone v. JefferdsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Witter v. PhelpsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Kreiss v. HotalingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Stanley v. GillenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Wells Fargo & Co. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. St. Clair v. BrixCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  3. Vogel v. MarshCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  4. Bryson v. HarrymanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  5. Craghill v. FordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932

4 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