Johnson v. Marr
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
ROTH, J., pro tem.
Respondent filed two several actions against defendants and appellants. One is based on fraud alleging damages in the sum of $3,000 (action No. 319760); the other (action No. 318472) is predicated upon the reasonable value of services rendered to appellants by respondent as an attorney at law, pursuant to employment of respondent by said appellants, which employment respondent terminated when he discovered the fraud which appellants had perpetrated upon him, and which fraud forms the basis of the fraud action. Because the parties and witnesses to both actions were identical,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cox v. McLaughlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
- Stanton v. Superior Court of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Swinnerton v. Argonaut Land & Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Erickson v. Stockton & Tuolumne Cty. R.R.California Supreme Court · 1905
- Kling v. GustasonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Switzer v. Wood, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- Page v. Bakersfield Uniform & Towel Supply Co.California Court of Appeal · 1966
- Owens v. PyeattCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Melny v. MelnyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Albertsworth v. Glens Falls Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1948
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.