Legal Opinion

Relovich v. Stuart

California Supreme Court

Decided January 28, 1931No. Docket No. L.A. 9849PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon an order sustaining a demurrer to the plaintiff’s second amended complaint without leave to amend. The action has been dismissed against all of the original defendants with the exception of the defendant, Mary Perkins Raymond, and certain fictitious defendants. Hereinafter, whenever the word “defendant” is used, it will refer to said defendant Mary Perkins Raymond.

The plaintiff in his second amended complaint alleges substantially the following:

In October, 1910, Dr. S. L. Stiiart and his wife were the owners of a certain tract of land…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Stanislaus Water Co. v. BachmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  2. Copeland v. Fairview Land & Water Co. & Lake Hemet Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Henrici v. South Feather Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Fawkes v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Bryan v. GrosseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Marra v. Aetna Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Coulter v. Sausalito Bay Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1932
  3. Richardson v. CallahanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Rilovich v. RaymondCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  5. Kelley v. RussellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942

11 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