Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. v. Justice's Court
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
This action is submitted upon the petition for the writ of prohibition and the brief in behalf of petitioner, there having been no appearance for the respondent. From the petition it appears that an action was commenced in the respondent court by Otto E. Koepke and Harry Koepke, copartners doing business under the name and style of Corcoran Electric Company, against the petitioner herein to recover the sum of $299.99 as damages. And it also appears that the summons in the action was attempted to be served upon Carl Heise, in the city and county of San Francisco, he being the designated agent…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Remsberg v. Hackney Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
- Simpson v. Police Court of RiversideCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Burge v. Justice's CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
- San Francisco Teaming Co. v. GrayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
- Hamberger v. Police CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- People v. FrankfortCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- People v. GordonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- People v. CobbCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Jardine v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- People v. SchmidtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.