Legal Opinion

Miller & Lux Inc. v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided October 31, 1923No. S. F. No. 10651. S. F. No. 10652. S. F. No. 10653PublishedCited by 91 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLennon, J.

Application is made to this court for a writ of mandate directing the Superior Court, in and for the County of Merced, to dismiss three several actions, entitled James J. Stevinson, a Corporation, v. Las Animas and San Joaquin Land Company Incorporated, a Corporation, et ah, No. 2102; James J. Stevinson, a Corporation, v. Miller & Lux Incorporated, a Corporation, et al., No. 2103, and East Side Canal & Irrigation Co., a Corporation, v. Miller & Lux Incorporated, a Corporation, et al., No. 2261. A dismissal is sought in each case, pursuant to the provisions of section 583 of the Code of Civil…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Andersen v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Romero v. SnyderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Larkin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  4. City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court of Tuolumne Cty.California Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Rio Vista Mining Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by91 opinions

  1. Christin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  2. In re GriffinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Tresway Aero, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Pacific Greyhound Lines v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  5. J. C. Penney Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959

86 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