Legal Opinion
Chin v. Meier
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 14, 1991No. B050696PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
235 Cal.App.3d 1473 (1991)
1 Cal. Rptr.2d 499
DAWN M. CHIN, Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.
ROBERT M. MEIER et al., Defendants and Respondents.
Docket No. B050696.
Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Six.
November 14, 1991.
COUNSEL
Lawrence Noble and Mark J. Gregersen for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Archbald & Spray, Barry Clifford Snyder and Peri Maziarz for Defendants and Respondents.
OPINION
YEGAN, J.
We hold that Code of Civil Procedure section 583.340, subdivision (c) tolling includes the aggregate time a case is continued because of courtroom unavailability regardless of whether a…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Moran v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
- Monzon v. Schaefer Ambulance Service, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1990
- Hartman v. SantamarinaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Marcus v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- State of California v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- De Santiago v. D AND G PLUMBING, INC.California Court of Appeal · 2007
- Hattersley v. American Nucleonics Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1992
- Tanguilig v. Neiman Marcus Grp., Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Coe v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Fidelity National Home Warranty Company CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.