Legal Opinion
Bennett v. Bennett
California Supreme Court
Decided October 3, 1933No. Docket No. L.A. 13366PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.
This is an action for separate maintenance instituted on June 20, 1924, by Sarah E. Bennett against her husband, Walton L. Bennett. Robert A. Brown and Arthur J. Brown, his son, were joined as defendants in this action. The complaint, in addition to the allegations which, if true, entitled the plaintiff to a judgment for separate maintenance, contained allegations to the effect that in March, 1921, her husband, Walton L. Bennett, and the Browns, had fraudulently conspired and agreed, each with the others, to deprive plaintiff of her interest and to defeat her rights in and to certain property…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ex parte SpencerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Johnson v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Lampson v. LampsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Parker v. ParkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Johnson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Dexter v. DexterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Silver v. ShemanskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Hamilton v. Oakland School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
- Gardiner v. GaitherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
- Argonaut Insurance Exchange v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.