Legal Opinion
Arnold v. Browne
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 23, 1972No. Civ. 29712PublishedCited by 59 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
TAYLOR, P. J.
In these consolidated appeals, plaintiffs, Arnold, Hench and Scheetz, appeal from that portion of the judgment denying recovery in their action against the individual defendants on grounds of alter ego. Arnold, Hench and Scheetz contend that the evidence does not support the trial court’s finding of no liability, and that in any event, the individual defendants are not entitled to attorneys’ fees. Browne, Bolton, Valentine, Peterson and McCann 2 appeal from that portion of the judgment denying them attorneys’ fees. Their contention that Civil Code section 1717 is a…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Crawford v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
- Automotriz Del Golfo De California v. ResnickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Minifie v. RowleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Associated Vendors, Inc. v. Oakland Meat Co.California Court of Appeal · 1962
- Stark v. CokerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Reynolds Metals Co. v. AlpersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- Dewitt Truck Brokers, Inc. v. W. Ray Flemming Fruit Company and W. Ray FlemmingCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1976
- Parker v. MatthewsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1976
- Seymour v. Hull & Moreland EngineeringCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
- Associated Convalescent Enterprises v. Carl Marks & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1973
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.