Legal Opinion

Egan v. Bishop

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 27, 1935No. Civ. 9206PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHINN, J., pro tem.

Plaintiff, as assignee of an attorney at law, recovered judgment, after verdict of a jury, on account of legal services rendered and for moneys advanced on behalf of the defendant. The complaint contained four causes of action, upon a book account, a mutual open and current account, an account stated and an account for services rendered and money advanced. Defendant appeals.

Extensive argument is made to the point that the trial court erred in denying a continuance. Motion for continuance was made October 10, 1932, in the calendar department of the court. We are told that…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Jeffords v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Furlow Pressed Brick Co. v. Balboa Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Bailey v. HoffmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  4. Colburn v. ParrettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
  5. Yick Wo v. UnderhillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Moss v. Underwriters' Report, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Parker v. Shell Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1946
  3. Bankr. L. Rep. P 75,031 in Re Roberts Farms Incorporated, Debtor. Roberts Farms Incorporated v. Glenn Bultman John KellyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  4. Gardner v. RutherfordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  5. Iverson, Yoakum, Papiano & Hatch v. BerwaldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999

21 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