In re Harkins
116 Cal. App. 769
This text of 116 Cal. App. 769 (In re Harkins) 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
In re Harkins, 116 Cal. App. 769 (Cal. Ct. App. 1931).
Opinion
it is the claim of the petitioner that the evidence is insufficient to support the order. The petitioner has presented no transcript of the testimony. The writ is denied under the authority of In re Rasmussen, 56 Cal. App. 368 [205 Pac. 72], and Brune v. Superior Court, 113 Cal. App. 21 [297 Pac. 566].
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Brune v. Superior Court
297 P. 566 (California Court of Appeal, 1931)
In Re Rasmusssen
205 P. 72 (California Court of Appeal, 1922)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
116 Cal. App. 769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-harkins-calctapp-1931.