Legal Opinion

All Service Life Insurance v. Catling

District Court, S.D. California

Decided March 26, 1959No. 289-58Published

1Opinion of the Court

HALL, District Judge.

The Defendant’s Motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint is based upon two grounds: First, that the facts alleged are not sufficient to constitute a cause of action for fraud, and second, the statute of limitations has expired, and plaintiff has not pleaded facts which would bring them within the exception of West’s Ann. California Code of Civil Procedure, § 338 which does not toll the statute until discovery of the fraud.

Neither point is well taken.

Briefly, the Complaint, in substance, alleges that the plaintiff is an Insurance Company; that the defendant Catling,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Merchants' National Bank v. GreenhoodMontana Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Levy v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  4. Bliss & Wood v. CouchSupreme Court of Kansas · 1891

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

Powered by the Exa API