Zany v. Rawhide Gold Mining Co.
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County and from an order refusing to set aside the judgment, and for leave to file an amended answer. G. W. Nicol, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The plaintiff, in a verified complaint, sued the defendant for $1,972.88, the balance due for boarding the employees of defendant, and furnishing material and teams and performing certain services for defendant at its special instance and request.
The defendant’s verified answer was as follows: “Comes now the defendant above named and for answer to the complaint in the above-entitled action, admits, denies and alleges as follows: First, it admits its incorporation as alleged in paragraph 1 of said complaint; second, upon its information and belief it denies each, all and singularly the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- San Francisco Gas Co. v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Hewel v. HoginCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
- Loveland v. GarnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Curtis v. Richards & VantineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Doll v. GoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Goldwater v. OltmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Davidow v. GriswoldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
- Brooks v. NelsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Dibble v. San Joaquin Light & Power Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1920
- Lincoln County Bank v. FettermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.