235 Cal.App.3d 1427, A051904, Snoke v. Bolen

Citation: 235 Cal.App.3d 1427, 1 Cal.Rptr.2d 492

Opinion Judge: [10] Haning

Party Name: Snoke v. Bolen

Attorney: [7] Carolyn L. Rosenblatt and Mary McLain for Plaintiff and Appellant. [8] Murphy, Pearson, Bradley & Feeney, Arthur V. Pearson and Emilia L. Sweeney for Defendant and Respondent.

Case Date: Thursday November 14, 1991

Court: California Court of Appeals

Linked as:

Document options

Printable page
Email this

Extract

235 Cal.App.3d 1427, A051904, Snoke v. Bolen

No longer available (Autolink)

See the full content of this document

This document cites

California - 56 Cal.2d 596, 20690, Austin v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co.
California - 21 Cal.3d 82, 30735, Marasco v. Wadsworth
California - 105 Cal.App.3d 628, 58503, Vanderbilt Growth Fund, Inc. v. Superior Court
California - 147 Cal.App.3d 113, 67056, Dover v. Sadowinski
California - 201 Cal.App.3d 1458, B029329, Hazel v. Hewlett

See all quotations