Legal Opinion

Flynn v. Fink

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 2, 1923No. Civ. No. 4073PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHouser, J.

The matter before the court on this appeal from the judgment arises out of the refusal by the judge of the lower court to postpone the date of trial. The facts are as follows: On July 7, 1921, the action was set for trial on the first day of December of the same year. On November 26, 1921, which would be five days before the date for the trial of this case, the firm of Smith & Breslin was substituted as attorneys for defendants, but the notice of substitution was not served on the attorneys for plaintiffs until the thirtieth day of November. On the day when the case was set for trial, to wit,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Sheldon v. LandwehrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Peolple v. WarrenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
  3. Peachy v. WitterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Haight v. GreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
  5. Kasson v. McChesneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Kalmus v. KalmusCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  2. People v. NolanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  3. County of San Bernardino v. Doria Mining & Engineering Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1977
  4. Ritter v. RitterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Vann v. ShillehCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975

15 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