Rosenthal v. McMann
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, from an order denying a new trial, and from an order made after judgment refusing to dismiss the action because of the failure to enter judgment within six months after its rendition. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Temple, C.
This record presents three appeals, — from the judgment, from the order refusing a new trial, and from an order made after judgment refusing to dismiss the action because judgment was not entered within six months after its rendition.
The action was brought to recover, damages for the conversion of five hundred dollars, and it is averred in the complaint, “ that on the fourteenth day of June, A. D. 1887, plaintiff was possessed of five hundred ($500) dollars in gold coin of the United States, and that she *508then was, and ever since has been, and now is, entitled to the possession…
2Cited by20 opinions
- Johnston v. BakerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Westbay v. GrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Dollar v. International Banking Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1910
- Silverstin v. Kohler & ChaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Bell v. SolomonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.