Legal Opinion

Dainty Pretzel Co. v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 7, 1935No. Civ. 9831PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

Petitioner herein was an “aggrieved” plaintiff in an action entitled Dainty Pretzel Co., Inc., v. J. A. Campbell Co., tried before a jury in respondent court. Thereafter, and within the time provided by law therefor, petitioner herein served and filed a proposed bill of exceptions in said action. Defendant in said action thereupon, after proper notice thereof, moved respondent court to strike said proposed bill of exceptions from its files upon the numerous grounds set forth in said motion. The motion to strike coming on regularly to be heard was granted by respondent court and the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hearst v. DennisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Pacific Land Ass'n v. HuntCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Fairbanks, Morse & Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  4. Rauer's Law & Collection Co. v. Templar Motors Co.California Court of Appeal · 1924

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Central Bank v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Keller v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  3. Wayman v. AlankoWyoming Supreme Court · 1960
  4. St. Clair v. BullockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Nichols v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938

3 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