Home/California Supreme Court/Cummins, Inc. v. SC

Cummins, Inc. v. SC

76 P.3d 364, 4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 703
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 10, 2003
DocketS117726
StatusPublished

This text of 76 P.3d 364 (Cummins, Inc. v. SC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cummins, Inc. v. SC, 76 P.3d 364, 4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 703 (Cal. 2003).

Opinion

4 Cal.Rptr.3d 703 (2003)
76 P.3d 364

CUMMINS, INC.
v.
S.C. (COX).

No. S117726.

Supreme Court of California.

September 10, 2003.

Tami S. Smason, Leila Nourani, Foley & Lardner, Los Angeles, CA, for Cummins, Inc.

Lawrence J. Hutchens, Attorney at Law, Michael Scott Humphries, Law Offices of Lawrence J. Hutchens, Bellflower, CA, for Edward D. Cox and Sandi R. Cox.

Patrick James Wehage, Thomas M. Murphy, Sutton & Murphy, Mission Viego, CA, for Winnebago Industries, Inc.

Martin William Anderson, Attorney at Law, Santa Ana, CA, for Anderson Law Firm.

Keith A. Dawson, Dawson & Dawson, Corona Del Mar, CA, for Monaco Coach Corporation.

Petition for review granted.

GEORGE, C.J., and KENNARD, BAXTER, WERDEGAR, CHIN, BROWN and MORENO, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
76 P.3d 364, 4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cummins-inc-v-sc-cal-2003.