Erskine v. Rolph

California Court of Appeal

Erskine v. Rolph

208 P. 981, 58 Cal. App. 790, 1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 627

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJuly 11, 1922

DocketCiv. No. 4321.

StatusPublished

This text of 208 P. 981 (Erskine 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

Erskine v. Rolph, 208 P. 981, 58 Cal. App. 790, 1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 627 (Cal. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

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

Richards, J., pro tem., and Myers, J., pro tem., were acting. *Page 791

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

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

Richards, J., pro tem., and Myers, J., pro tem., were acting. *Page 791

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 P. 981, 58 Cal. App. 790, 1922 Cal. App. LEXIS 627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/erskine-v-rolph-calctapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack