Legal Opinion

Costello v. Bell

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 26, 1915No. Civ. No. 1456PublishedCited by 1 opinion

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco denying a motion for a change of place of trial. E. P. Mogan, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion of the defendants Bell and Schlut for a change of venue from the city and county of San Francisco to the county of Sacramento, their place of residence.

The facts of the case as shown by the plaintiff’s complaint are as follows: On February 9, 1913, the plaintiff was the owner of a certain Stoddard-Dayton automobile which he had intrusted to the Acme garage in San Francisco for sale. On that day the defendants Menrath and Williams (alias Fisk) undertook to purchase said machine from said garage, giving therefor a false check for the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Faulkner v. First National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Greenleaf v. JacksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Foster v. FernandesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API