Legal Opinion

Richardson v. Rose

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 24, 1961No. Civ. 25466PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtHerndon, J.

Plaintiff appeals from an order granting' defendants’ motion for change of venue. Since no respondents’ brief has been filed, we have followed the procedure set forth in rule 17(b) of the Rules on Appeal. “ ‘Under the provisions of that rule we are entitled to accept as true the statement of facts in the opening brief. We are under no duty to seek out points of law in support of the judgment. . . .’ (Postin v. Griggs, 66 Cal.App.2d 147, 148 [151 P.2d 887] ; Brunscher v. Reagh, 164 Cal.App.2d 174, 175 [330 P.2d 396].) However, this does not mean that reversal is automatic, since the burden…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Davis v. JacobyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Ward Manufacturing Co. v. MileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  3. Baumgartner v. MeekCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  4. Postin v. GriggsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  5. Evans v. EvansCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Johnson v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API