Chilton v. Rolph

California Court of Appeal

Chilton v. Rolph

58 Cal. App. 787

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJuly 11, 1922

DocketCiv. No. 4318

StatusPublished

This text of 58 Cal. App. 787 (Chilton v. Rolph) 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

Chilton v. Rolph, 58 Cal. App. 787 (Cal. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

[1] Let a peremptory writ issue as prayed on the authority of Oscar Heyman & Brother (a Corporation) v. Edwin C. Bath et al., ante, p. 499 [208 Pac. 981].

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 September 7, 1922.

All the Justices present concurred.

Bichards, J., pro tern., and Myers, J., pro tern., were acting.

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

THE COURT.

[1] Let a peremptory writ issue as prayed on the authority of Oscar Heyman & Brother (a Corporation) v. Edwin C. Bath et al., ante, p. 499 [208 Pac. 981].

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 September 7, 1922.

All the Justices present concurred.

Bichards, J., pro tern., and Myers, J., pro tern., were acting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 Cal. App. 787, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chilton-v-rolph-calctapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack