Legal Opinion

Filmer v. Davis

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 23, 1928No. Docket No. 6296PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

Respondent made a motion herein to affirm the judgment appealed from upon the ground that appellant has failed to comply with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure, section 953c, by failing to print in his brief or in a supplement thereto “such portions of the record as they desire (he desires) to call to the attention of the court.” Pearson v. Parsons, 173 Cal. 331 [159 Pac. 1171]; Estate of Berry, 195 Cal. 354 [233 Pac. 330]; Jeffords v. Young, 197 Cal. 224 [239 Pac. 1054], and other cases are cited and relied on by respondent. In the last-cited case the supreme court’s…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Johnson v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Jeffords v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Hallidie v. EngingerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Dahlberg v. DahlbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Gray v. EllisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hughes v. QuackenbushCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  2. Woods v. BerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  3. Withers v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1929
  4. Deist v. BeckCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API