Hooe v. O'Callaghan
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco denying a new trial. John. Hunt, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtKerrigan, J.
This action was brought by Raleigh P. Hooe, as assignee of his wife, Etta Mae Hooe, against defendant Daniel 0 ’Callaghan, to recover $500, alleged to have been received by defendant from E. J. Campion, the intervener, for the use of Mrs. Hooe.
At the conclusion of the introduction of evidence, the court, being of opinion that no issue or question or fact was presented for determination, instructed the jury to return a verdict for Campion, the intervener, and against the plaintiff and defendant. This was done, and in due time a judgment was accordingly entered. This is an appeal by plaintiff…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- The Title & Document Restoration Co. v. KerriganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Easton v. MontgomeryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Benson v. ShotwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Turner v. McDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Gwin v. CalegarisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Crim v. UmbsenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Bell v. StadlerIdaho Supreme Court · 1918
- Born v. CastleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913
- Carter v. FoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
- Griesemer v. HammondCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.