Legal Opinion
Munoz v. Purdy
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 16, 1979No. Civ. 16980PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WIENER, J.
We are asked to decide in this appeal whether the trial court properly interpreted and applied Code of Civil Procedure section 474 1 in granting Everett K. Purdy’s motion for summary judgment based upon the one-year statute of limitations (§ 340.5). For the reasons which we will discuss, we conclude the trial court used an erroneous standard in holding that the plaintiff was charged with not only her actual knowledge at the time she filed suit, but information that she could have obtained upon the exercise of reasonable diligence which would have enabled her to file suit…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Order of Railroad Telegraphers v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Elkins v. DerbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Austin v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
- Sanchez v. South Hoover HospitalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Grudt v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Cabrales v. County of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- Barrington v. A. H. Robins Co.California Supreme Court · 1985
- Woo v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Donald Lindley and Rita Lindley v. General Electric Company, Etc., and Stone & Webster Engineering CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Lorna Kreines v. United States of America, and Jack McMenimen Wayne YamashitaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.