Legal Opinion

Foster v. Young

California Supreme Court

Decided March 14, 1916No. L. A. No. 3527. In BankPublishedCited by 29 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.

These appeals were heard by the district court of appeal of the second appellate district. Upon petition a hearing before this court was ordered for the reason that, while a majority of the justices of this court fully agreed with the learned district court of appeal in the dis- mission by that court of the denial of defendant’s motion for a new trial, some doubt was entertained regarding the conclusions reached in the decision of the appeal from the" judgment. After a hearing before this court, and further study of the case, we still agree with our brethren of the district court upon the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Moore v. CoppCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Lauricella v. LauricellaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Sterling v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Brooks v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Los Angeles County Bank v. RaynorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Endicott Johnson Corp. v. Encyclopedia Press, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
  2. Coleman v. FarwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Taylor v. MadiganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  4. Wiley v. EasterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  5. Agnew v. CroninCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957

24 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