Legal Opinion

Dawson v. Dawson

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 16, 1927No. Docket No. 4740PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtYork, J.

Before an issue of fact had been joined, defendants moved, under section 395 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to have the trial of the action transferred to the county of Los Angeles, on the undisputed fact that they were residents of the county of Los Angeles at the time of the commencement of the action, and were not at the time of the commencement of the action, or at the time of the hearing, residents of Imperial County. An objection was made by the plaintiff to the removal of the cause on account of alleged convenience of witnesses, under subdivision 3 of section 397 of the Code of Civil…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cook v. PendergastCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
  2. Miller & Lux v. Kern County Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Sheffield v. Pickwick StagesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Ennis-Brown Co. v. LongCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1908
  5. Wong Fung Hing v. San Francisco Relief & Red Cross FundsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Gordon v. PerkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Woods v. BerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  3. Sowers v. SowersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  4. DeLong v. DeLongCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Anderson v. SpringerIdaho Supreme Court · 1956

3 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