Legal Opinion

Klopstock v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided January 10, 1941No. S. F. 16405PublishedCited by 145 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.

This is a petition for a writ of mandate to compel the respondent superior court to dismiss an action, after a general reversal of the judgment rendered at the previous trial.

The facts concerning the controversy are fully stated in a prior appeal. (Samter v. Klopstock Realty Co., 31 Cal. App. (2d) 532 [88 Pac. (2d) 250].) In 1926, Klopstock Realty Company, a corporation, had been organized, with its entire stock held by three brothers, Isaac, Frederick and Samuel Klopstock, who were also its directors. In 1933 Isaac died, leaving a will appointing his wife, Grace, and his brother, Frederick,…

2Cases cited40 opinions

  1. Hawes v. OaklandSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
  2. Frost v. WitterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Harriss v. TamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
  4. Smith v. San Francisco & North Pacific Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Whitten v. DabneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915

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

3Cited by145 opinions

  1. Desny v. WilderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co.California Court of Appeal · 1981
  3. Austin v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Quiroz v. Seventh Avenue CenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
  5. HFH, LTD. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975

140 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