Legal Opinion

Hull v. Laugharn

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 24, 1934No. Civ. 8801PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILLIS, J., pro tem.

Respondent filed an action in the lower court against appellants wherein the complaint was denominated “Complaint for Trespass and Damage”. He alleged actual and peaceable possession and right to posses-session of certain real property, and ownership and possession of certain personal property located thereon, of a certain value, with which he was operating on said real property a licensed game as a business, the good will of which was of a certain value; that on March 29, 1931, appellants entered upon said real property without the consent of respondent and forcibly broke…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Poggi v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Edwards v. JenkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Gartlan v. C. A. Hooper & Co.California Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Blumenberg v. MyresCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  5. Hauxhurst v. LobreeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Gruber v. Pacific States Savings & Loan Co.California Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Kee v. BeckerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  3. Watson v. Stockton Morris Plan Co.California Court of Appeal · 1939
  4. Kessinger v. Organic Fertilizers, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. Staley v. McClurkenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939

10 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