Legal Opinion
Toms v. Hellman
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 18, 1931No. Docket No. 7671PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GRAY, J., pro tem.
To the first question asked by appellants of their first witness, respondents objected on the ground that the complaint as amended (hereinafter referred to as the complaint) did not state a cause of action. This objection was sustained and thereafter a judgment of dismissal was entered. The objection was, in effect, a general demurrer to the complaint. (Moore v. Douglas, 132 Cal. 399 [64 Pac. 705].) The parties agree that the sole question for determination upon this appeal is whether the complaint states a cause of action.
The complaint- alleges that a named corporation, in…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Spinney v. DowningCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- United Iron Works v. Outer Harbor Dock & Wharf Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
- Breckinridge v. CrockerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Mercantile Trust Co. v. Sunset Road Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
- Levin v. SaroffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Kerr Glass Manufacturing Corp. v. Elizabeth Arden Sales Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1943
- Deering-Milliken & Co., Inc., a Corporation v. Modern-Aire of Hollywood, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
- National Dollar Stores, Ltd. v. WagnonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Pacific Coast Joint Stock Land Bank v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- Hayward Lumber & Investment Co. v. LydersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.