Legal Opinion

Freitas v. Passerino

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 3, 1933No. Docket No. 8736PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.

This is a motion to dismiss an appeal or affirm the judgment. (Rules for Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal, Rule V. subd. 3.) The plaintiffs contend that the appeal was taken for delay only and that the questions on which the decision of the cause depends are so unsubstantial as not to need further argument.

For the injuries sustained in an automobile collision the plaintiffs commenced an action against the defendants to recover damages. The defendants filed an answer and a cross-complaint. The plaintiffs answered the cross-complaint and on the issues so framed the action was tried…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Swartz v. Acme Express & Drayage Co.California Court of Appeal · 1929
  2. Jensen v. FishCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Satterlee v. Orange Glenn School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Mathers v. County of RiversideCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Hernández v. BallesterSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1936
  4. Satterlee v. Orange Glenn School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API