Legal Opinion

Lichtenberg v. Burdell

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 30, 1929No. Docket No. 6548PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, J., pro tem.

This action was commenced to declare a trust in favor of plaintiff and to enforce an accounting thereof.

In the court below plaintiff prevailed and after accounting had it was found that a large sum of money was due to the plaintiff and judgment entered accordingly. The defendant appeals from said judgment and urges that under the facts as shown no judgment at all should have been rendered against him. Plaintiff appeals and contends that under the facts found by the trial court, as a matter of law, the judgment should be for a much greater amount.

The basis of the action and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Ryder v. BambergerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Kleinclaus v. DutardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
  3. Western Pac. Ry. Co. v. GodfreyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Holton v. NobleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  5. Hunter v. McKenzieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Shapiro v. Equitable Life Assurance SocietyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  2. Zakaessian v. ZakaessianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  3. Heffron v. DugginsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1940
  4. Rouse v. UnderwoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
  5. Mears v. JeffryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API