Osborn v. Osborn
California Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
CARTER, J., Concurring and Dissenting.
I concur in the reversal of that portion of the judgment from which plaintiff appealed, which reads as follows: “That plaintiff take nothing by reason of his amended complaint herein and that defendant Louise L. Osborn have judgment for costs of court expended in the sum of $-,” but I dissent from the holding of the majority that the judgment against defendant *368and cross-complainant from which no appeal was taken must also be reversed. That portion of the judgment reads as follows: ‘ ‘ That cross-complainant take nothing by reason of her cross-complaint…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hamasaki v. FlothoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- In re the Estate of BurdickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. FisherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Whalen v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Harrelson v. Miller & Lux Inc.California Supreme Court · 1920
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.