Legal Opinion

Roehl v. the Texas Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 16, 1930No. Docket No. 264PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HAINES, J., pro tem.

The complaint of plaintiff and respondent John F. M. Roehl in the above cause having on July 26, 1928, been filed in the superior court, summons issued thereon and service was one day later attempted on defendant and appellant The Texas Company by delivery in San Diego County of a copy of the same annexed to a copy of the complaint to one C. L. Lorden, stated in the sheriff’s return to be its “district managing agent.” Defendant (now appellant) not having appeared or answered, its default was entered on August 9, 1928, and judgment against it followed on August 11, 1928.

Sub…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Doak v. BrusonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Holzer v. . Dodge BrothersNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
  3. Taylor v. Granite State Provident Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
  4. Norton v. Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fé RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Blanc v. Paymaster Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1892

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Cosper v. Smith & Wesson Arms Co.California Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Pasadena Medi-Center Associates v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Eclipse Fuel Engineering Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  4. Gibble v. Car-Lene Research, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1998
  5. Riskin v. TowersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944

14 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