162 Cal.App.2d 625, 22792, Lincoln v. Didak

Citation: 162 Cal.App.2d 625, 328 P.2d 498

Opinion Judge: [9] The Court

Party Name: Lincoln v. Didak

Attorney: [7] A. Lincoln, in pro. per., for Appellant. [8] Roger Arnebergh, City Attorney (Los Angeles), William B. Burge, Deputy City Attorney, Harold W. Kennedy, County Counsel (Los Angeles), and Lloyd S. Davis, Deputy County Counsel, for Respondents.

Case Date: Wednesday August 06, 1958

Court: California Court of Appeals

Linked as:

Document options

Printable page
Email this

Extract

162 Cal.App.2d 625, 22792, Lincoln v. Didak

No longer available (Autolink)

See the full content of this document

This document cites

California - 42 Cal.2d 149, 18869, Vallindras v. Massachusetts Etc. Ins. Co.
California - 44 Cal.2d 321, 23649, Crowley v. Modern Faucet Mfg. Co.
California - 46 Cal.2d 208, 19361, Pianka v. State
California - 109 Cal.App.2d 803, 14726, Utz v. Aureguy
California - 129 Cal.App.2d 165, 20342, Stafford v. Yerge

See all quotations