Legal Opinion

Muller v. Muller

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 10, 1958No. Civ. 17467PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McMURRAY, J. pro tem. *

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment after demurrer of the defendant to the third amended and supplemental complaint of the plaintiff was sustained without leave to amend. Appellant had appealed upon a clerk’s transcript requesting the preparation of the following: “1) Third Amended and Supplemental Complaint for Cancellation and Reeission [sic] of Deed for Fraud and Deceit; For Reconveyance; For Want of Consideration; And to Remove a Cloud (Filed March 9, 1956) 2) Demurer [sic] of Lelah Muller to Third Amended Complaint of William Muller (Filed on or about March 16,1956)…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Zakaessian v. ZakaessianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  2. Lee v. HensleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  3. Vanasek v. PokornyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. City & County of San Francisco v. MullerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  2. Muller v. MullerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  3. Sterling v. GalenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  4. Muller v. HallenbeckCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  5. Muller v. MullerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API