Legal Opinion

Rapaport v. Forer

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 8, 1937No. Civ. 5787PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPullen, P. J.

By this appeal Max Rapaport, as appellant, is attacking a judgment sustaining a demurrer to his first amended complaint without leave to amend.

To understand the issues it will be necessary to summarize briefly the amended complaint, which is in three separate causes of action. The first cause of action alleges that plaintiff Max Rapaport in July, 1934, recovered a judgment approximating the sum of $400 against Earl Forer, in the Municipal Court of Los Angeles which, prior to the commencement of the present action, had been assigned to A. Marks, also known as Tillie Marks Rapaport; that Earl…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Bowman v. WohlkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Moropoulos v. C. H. & O. B. Fuller Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Union Labor Hosp. Ass'n v. Vance Redwood Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Aalwyn's Law Institute v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Stenzel v. KronickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Harm v. FrasherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  2. Johnston v. LongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Orloff v. Metropolitan Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Moss v. MossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  5. Barkett v. BrucatoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953

11 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