Legal Opinion

Hamburgh v. Hys

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 3, 1937No. Civ. 10540PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpence, Acting P. J.

Plaintiffs sued as husband and wife to recover damages for personal injuries to plaintiff Virginia Hamburgh and for injuries to their automobile. They recovered a joint judgment in the sum of $2,500 and from said judgment defendants appeal.

The sole contention made by appellants is that “The joint judgment in favor of plaintiffs is contrary to law and without support in the evidence for the reason that the evidence established that plaintiffs were not husband and wife.” We find no merit in this contention.

The marriage license and marriage certificate were introduced in evidence together with…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hunter v. HunterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Wilcox v. WilcoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Marsh v. Van Allen MarshCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  4. Brigham v. HughsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Hammond v. CailleaudCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Rediker v. RedikerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Branford Baptist Church v. NicholsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Goldberg v. GoldbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  4. Smith v. AtkinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Briggs v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1950

11 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