O'Brien v. O'Brien
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco denying defendants’ motion to change the place of trial. Thomas F. Graham, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Frank James, E. C. Chapman, and Frank W. Taft, for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
The purpose of this appeal is to review the order of the trial court denying defendants’ motion for a change of the place of trial.
The complaint is quite a voluminous document and only such of its averments will be stated as will show the nature of the action and serve to disclose the reasons for denying defendants’ motion.
It is alleged that in his lifetime plaintiff’s testate, Joseph A. 0 ’Brien, and defendants, Charles F. O ’Brien and William T. Garrett, were partners, under the firm name of 0 ’Brien & Garrett, doing business in the city of San Francisco as agents for the sale of land…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McKenzie v. BarlingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Hearne v. De YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Hellman v. LoganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Greenleaf v. JacksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- O'Brien v. O'BrienCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Monogram Co. v. KingsleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Mitchell v. KimCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Big Springs Land & Livestock Co. v. BeckIdaho Supreme Court · 1928
- Harbinson v. AffeldtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Nieves v. Sucesión MangualSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1923
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.