Legal Opinion

Dorcy v. Brodis

California Supreme Court

Decided May 28, 1908No. S.F. No. 4641PublishedCited by 5 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. William A. Bowden, Charles M. Cassin, and James P. Sex, for Appellant.

1Opinion of the CourtLorigan, J.

This, is an appeal by plaintiff from an order dismissing his motion for a new trial.

The action was brought to quiet title to a tract of land in the county of Santa Cruz, in which judgment was rendered in favor of the defendants and against plaintiff. In due time and on May 18, 1905, plaintiff gave notice of intention to move for a new trial. Thereafter, on June 1, 1905, his counsel served on the attorney for defendants what purported to be a statement in support of said motion. On the thirty-first day of August thereafter, defendants prepared and served upon plaintiff their proposed…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Galbraith v. LoweCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Boggs v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
  3. Hopkins v. Western Pacific RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Caminetti v. Edward Brown & SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Derr v. BusickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
  3. Bryan v. TevisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Price v. Northern Pacific Ry. Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Caminetti v. Edward Brown & SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API