Legal Opinion

Lehman v. Richfield Oil Corp.

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 13, 1953No. Civ. 19692PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.

From an order granting defendants’ motion for a nonsuit at the conclusion of appellant’s evidence, she prosecutes this appeal against respondent Holtzman only.

The substance of appellant’s evidence is as follows: Respondent operates a filling station and parking lot on Grand Avenue in Los Angeles. He maintains for profit a telephone booth for public use. On a busy afternoon, May 7, 1951, about 3:30 o’clock, appellant and her companion, David Eiehenlaub, drove to a point on Grand Avenue from which for 10 minutes she and David kept the booth under surveillance and observed the movements of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Hatfield v. Levy BrothersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Raber v. TuminCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Hamilton v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Louie v. Hagstrom's Food Stores, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1947
  5. Girvetz v. Boys' Market, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1949

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Isaacson v. Husson CollegeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1972
  2. Oldenburg v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1957
  3. Virtue v. FlyntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  4. Farrier v. LevinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Frazier v. Yor-Way Market, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1960

7 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