Legal Opinion

Medical Finance Ass'n v. Karnes

Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California

Decided November 30, 1938No. Civ. A. No. 4121PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchauer, J.

Plaintiff, which has a judgment against defendants Ben Taft Karnes and his wife, Matilda Karnes, for a common necessity of life (medical services furnished to their minor child by plaintiff's assignor) instituted proceedings under section 715 of the Code of Civil Procedure to compel defendants to apply in partial satisfaction of the judgment certain moneys earned by the defendant husband, as a member of the United States Navy, and which it was anticipated would be paid to him or his codefendant at a subsequent time, in due course of governmental business. From an order denying plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bruton v. TearleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  2. In re DowneyMontana Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Hammond v. HoskinsAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1938

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kipperman v. Proulx (In Re Burns)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  2. Medical Finance Assn. v. ShortCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  3. Kipperman v. Proulx (In re Burns)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API