Legal Opinion

Adler v. City of Pasadena

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 3, 1964No. Docket Nos. 28113, 28114, 28115, 28116PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKingsley, J.

This proceeding involves consolidated appeals by plaintiffs (with the exception of plaintiffs Nelson and Pieper, who have not appealed from the judgment), and by defendants 2 from a judgment determining that defendants are liable to plaintiffs for unpaid pension benefits which accrued within six months prior to the filing of a formal claim therefor. Defendants’ appeals are concerned with the sole issue of whether or not the plaintiffs were entitled to prejudgment interest pursuant to the provisions of section 3287 of the Civil Code. Plaintiffs’ appeals are primarily concerned with the issue…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Abbott v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Allen v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Benson v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Sandstoe v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1938
  5. Henry v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Thierfeldt v. Marin Hospital DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
  2. Stromberg, Inc. v. Los Angeles County Flood Control DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  3. Todd Shipyards Corp. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
  4. Boller v. Signal Oil & Gas Co.California Court of Appeal · 1964
  5. State ex rel. State Board of Equalization v. VanderwoodMontana Supreme Court · 1965

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