Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Plum v. Becket

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 8, 1932No. Docket No. 7964PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKnight, J.

Plaintiff brought this action in the city and county of San Francisco to recover damages for an alleged malicious prosecution, which it is claimed took place in Plumas County, it being charged in the complaint that the defendant S. C. Young as district attorney of said county and the defendant Láveme Becket conspired to and did maliciously prosecute plaintiff and bring about his conviction before a jury in a justice’s court, upon an unfounded misdemeanor charge, to wit: “discharging an employee Avithout paying his wages, with intent to hinder, harass and defraud such employee; in violation of…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. People v. MooneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  2. Holliday v. HollidayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Monk v. EhretCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Carpenter v. SibleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Carpenter v. NutterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Kachig v. BootheCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
  2. Norton v. John M. C. Marble Co.California Court of Appeal · 1939
  3. Prentice v. BertkenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  4. Andrews v. YoungCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  5. Williams v. California Milk Producers Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API