Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Municipal Ct., Los Angeles

283 P. 347, 102 Cal. App. 797
California Court of Appeal·Decided December 16, 1929·No. Docket No. 6841.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

On writ of review of a summary judgment entered upon forfeiture of a bail bond. [1] The grounds upon which petitioner claims that the judgment should be annulled are included in the questions which have been discussed in our Civil No. 6799,Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Superior Court et al., ante, p. 566 [283 P. 345], in which the decision has been this day filed. We think that the respondent court acted within, and not in excess of, its jurisdiction.

The judgment is affirmed.

Houser, J., and York, J., concurred.

*Page 798

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

Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Municipal Ct., Los Angeles, 283 P. 347, 102 Cal. App. 797 (Cal. Ct. App. 1929).

283 P. 347 (Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Municipal Ct., Los Angeles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Ross
221 Cal. App. 2d 443 (California Court of Appeal, 1963)