Legal Opinion

Meadow v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1963No. L. A. 27128PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchauer, J.

Petitioners husband and wife seek through mandamus and prohibition to compel respondent Los Angeles Superior Court to grant petitioner wife’s motion for substitution of attorneys in a divorce suit brought by her against petitioner husband and to thereafter dismiss such suit, and also to restrain that court from any further action in connection with the divorce other than as above stated. The law firm of Beilenson, Meyer, Rosenfeld & Susman (hereinafter referred to as BMR&S), are the attorneys of record for the wife in the divorce suit. They have appeared as real parties in interest in…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Echlin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  2. O'CONNELL v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Marshank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  4. Kelly v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Hendricks v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Isrin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Adams v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  3. Kallen v. DelugCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  4. Wiener v. Van WinkleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  5. Rader v. ThrasherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972

12 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