Bagley v. Lilienthal

California Court of Appeal

Bagley v. Lilienthal

19 Cal. App. 273

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJune 15, 1912

DocketCiv. No. 1042

StatusPublished

This text of 19 Cal. App. 273 (Bagley v. Lilienthal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bagley v. Lilienthal, 19 Cal. App. 273 (Cal. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

BURNETT, J.

This ease involves the same questions as Bagley v. Bloom et al. (No. 1041), ante, p. 255, [125 Pac. 931], and for the reasons stated in the opinion this day filed therein, the judgment is affirmed.

Lennon, P. J., and Kerrigan, J., concurred.

A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on August 14, 1912.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BURNETT, J.

This ease involves the same questions as Bagley v. Bloom et al. (No. 1041), ante, p. 255, [125 Pac. 931], and for the reasons stated in the opinion this day filed therein, the judgment is affirmed.

Lennon, P. J., and Kerrigan, J., concurred.

A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on August 14, 1912.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 Cal. App. 273, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bagley-v-lilienthal-calctapp-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack