Legal Opinion

Gosliner v. Briones

California Supreme Court

Decided December 14, 1921No. S. F. No. 9031PublishedCited by 41 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco.. W. H. Thomas, Judge presiding. Modified and affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

Plaintiff Edward S. Gosliner instituted the present action against defendants Frank Briones, William Latter, and Belle Latter for the purpose of recovering damages for the destruction of a certain dwelling-house and windmill alleged to have belonged to said plaintiff. Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff in the sum of twenty-five hundred dollars, the reasonable value of the demolished structures, and defendants appeal, relying upon a record consisting of the judgment-roll and a bill of exceptions. [1] Since the bill of exceptions contains nothing which even purports to specify wherein…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hendy v. DinkerhoffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Lavenson v. Standard Soap Co.California Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Merchants' National Bank of Crookston v. StantonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  4. Carter v. CantyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  5. Miller v. WaddinghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

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

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Crocker National Bank v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
  2. San Diego Trust & Savings Bank v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  3. City of Los Angeles v. KlinkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  4. M. P. Moller, Inc. v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  5. R. Barcroft & Sons Co. v. CullenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933

36 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