Legal Opinion

Chino Land & Water Co. v. Hamaker

California Supreme Court

Decided January 14, 1916No. L. A. No. 4343PublishedCited by 6 opinions

MOTION to affirm certain judgments of the Superior Court of Orange County. W. H. Thomas, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Kimball Fletcher, Wm. A. Gaines, and D. J. Hinkley, for Appellants.

1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, C. J.

Plaintiff and respondent Chino Land & Water Company, a corporation, has made a motion that this court affirm the judgment in each of the above-entitled cases, which are presented upon a single transcript, upon the ground substantially that an inspection of the record discloses that in view of a certain recent decision of the United States supreme court, the judgments of the lower court must be affirmed. This motion is made long before the appeals are reached in regular order for hearing in this court, the real purpose of the motion being, of course, to advance the hearing of the appeals in…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Ferraro v. Southern California Gas Co.California Court of Appeal · 1980
  2. Gogerty v. Coachella Valley Junior College DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Tobias v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  4. McKeon v. SambranoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Robbins v. Sonoma County Flood Control & Water Conservation DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956

1 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