Legal Opinion

Cravens v. Coghlan

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 7, 1957No. Civ. 17324PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeters, P. J.

The plaintiff brought this action against defendant executrix on a rejected claim for the value of work and services allegedly rendered by plaintiff to Nathan C. Coghlan, the decedent. The complaint is in proper form and contains all of the allegations required in such actions. Defendant demurred on the sole ground that plaintiff did not have the capacity to sue because, so it is alleged, when the complaint was filed, and when the services were rendered, plaintiff was either in the state prison, serving time for a felony, or was on parole, and had not received the permission of the Adult…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Postin v. GriggsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  2. Crofts & Anderson v. H. L. Petersen Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1955

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Wallis v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  2. Cicone v. URS Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1986
  3. McConnell v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Childs v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  5. Leach v. Drummond Medical Group, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1983

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