Legal Opinion

Russell v. Weyand

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 14, 1935No. Civ. 1386PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.

By this, proceeding in mandamus the petitioner seeks to compel respondent to certify a typewritten transcript on appeal prepared at petitioner’s direction so that he may thereby be enabled to perfect an appeal from an order made by respondent in a certain action which he and three other persons had instituted. This action was entitled Russell et al. v. Rougheot et al.

Prom the petition and respondent’s return thereto it is apparent that the action of Russell v. Rougheot was one that was instituted by petitioner and his associates as stockholders of a corporation for the benefit of the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Whitten v. DabneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Loeb v. BermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,301 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Spence & Green Chemical Company and Andrew Spence, Sr.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
  2. Klopstock v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Parish v. Maryland & Virginia Milk Producers Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1968
  4. Hogan v. IngoldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Patrick v. Alacer Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2008

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