212 Cal.App.2d 18, 26118, Hazel v. McGrath

Citation: 212 Cal.App.2d 18, 27 Cal.Rptr. 713

Opinion Judge: [10] Burke

Party Name: Hazel v. McGrath

Attorney: [7] Butterworth & Smith, Gene E. Smith and David G. Waller for Plaintiff and Appellant. [8] Parker, Stanbury, McGee, Peckham & Garrett and Daren T. Johnson for Defendant and Respondent.

Case Date: January 17, 1963

Court: California Court of Appeals

Linked as:

Document options

Printable page
Email this

Extract

212 Cal.App.2d 18, 26118, Hazel v. McGrath

No longer available (Autolink)

See the full content of this document

This document cites

California - 17 Cal.2d 85, 16070, Fewel & Dawes, Inc. v. Pratt
California - 24 Cal.2d 232, 18664, Davenport v. Stratton
California - 112 Cal.App.2d 638, 18937, Estate of Teed
California - 124 Cal.App.2d 466, 19828, Rideau v. Los Angeles Transit Lines
California - 139 Cal.App.2d 353, 16577, Elm v. Mckee

See all quotations