Legal Opinion

Podrat v. Oberndorff

California Supreme Court

Decided June 27, 1929No. Docket No. L.A. 9093PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.

An appeal in this cause was taken by certain defendants from the whole of the judgment in favor of plaintiffs, foreclosing a chattel mortgage and ordering a sale of the property covered thereby. Since the said appeal the judgment has been satisfied in all respects except as to the item of $517.67 allowed plaintiffs as attorneys’ fees and the item of $140.04 allowed as taxes paid. The relationship of the various parties, to the issues involved in the action is such that considerable space would be required to explain the situation, but this, if done, would throw no light upon the questions now…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Blodgett v. RheinschildCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
  2. Harper v. GordonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Brickell v. BatchelderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
  4. Mercantile Trust Co. v. San Joaquin Agricultural Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1928
  5. Ely v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ford & Vlahos v. ITT Commercial Finance Corp.California Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Noland v. NolandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  3. Jolly v. ThorntonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  4. KMAP, INC. v. Town & Country Broadcasters, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1975
  5. Ossmen v. Commercial Credit Corp.Idaho Supreme Court · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API