Legal Opinion

Nathanson v. Murphy

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 19, 1955No. Civ. 16329PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBray, J.

In an action for deceit and false representation plaintiff recovered judgment of $5,000 and interest from June 11, 1947. Thereafter the trial court made an “Order Modifying Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Heretofore Signed” and an “Order Modifying Judgment.” Defendants appeal from the judgment. * Plaintiff appeals from the- two orders.

Questions Presented

Defendants’ Appeal

I. Sufficiency of the evidence and of allegations of the complaint.

II. Was Joseph Nathanson a real party in interest?

III. The correct measure of damage.. IV. Error in denying admission of evidence concerning claimed…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Gagne v. BertranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Bagdasarian v. GragnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Sutter v. General Petroleum Corp.California Supreme Court · 1946
  5. Feckenscher v. GambleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Mirkin v. WassermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Lingsch v. SavageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  3. Bullis v. Security Pacific National BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  4. St. Joseph Hospital v. Corbetta Construction Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1974
  5. Michelson v. HamadaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994

29 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