Marshall v. Marshall
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtKnight, J.
This appeal was taken on the judgment-roll alone. The sole question presented is whether the trial court, after having denied plaintiff a divorce, exceeded its jurisdiction, as defendant contends, in decreeing, in accordance with the allegations of the complaint, that plaintiff was the sole and separate owner of a lot described therein.
*707An analogous situation was before the Supreme Court in the case of Allen v. Allen, 159 Cal. 197 [113 Pac. 160, 162], in an appeal from a judgment rendered in an action to set aside a deed', and it was held that the trial court did not exceed its jurisdiction.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Allen v. AllenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Glass v. GlassCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
- Carr v. Carr Co.California Court of Appeal · 1918
- Barrow v. BarrowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- West v. WestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
3Cited by9 opinions
- Spahn v. SpahnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- Lorraine v. LorraineCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Piana v. PianaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1961
- Citizens National Trust & Savings Bank v. HawkinsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Porter v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.