Legal Opinion
Miller v. Lucas
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 26, 1975No. Civ. 45463PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KINGSLEY, Acting P. J.
Wendell Miller is appealing from an order (Code Civ. Proc., § 581d) dismissing plaintiff’s action entered after the demurrer of defendants James Lucas and Bell & Howell Company to plaintiff’s second amended complaint was sustained without leave to amend. The original complaint was filed March 20, 1972; it was amended twice and on April 25, 1975, the judge sustained the demurrer to each of plaintiff’s nine tort causes of action on the ground that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. The nine tort causes of action are for: (1) malicious prosecution; (2)…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- American Well Works Company v. Layne and Bowler CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Zalkind v. ScheinmanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Farmland Irrigation Co. v. DopplmaierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- David v. ParkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- American Securit Co. v. Shatterproof Glass Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1958
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Linear Technology Corp. v. Applied Materials, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2007
- Mattel, Inc. v. Luce, Forward, Hamilton & ScrippsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Caldera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Regents of the UniversityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Dow Chemical Co. v. Exxon Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1998
- Linear Technology v. Applied MaterialsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007