Rishebarger v. Stockwell-Kling Corp.

California Court of Appeal

Rishebarger v. Stockwell-Kling Corp.

128 Cal. App. 779

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedDecember 14, 1932

DocketCiv. No. 8664

StatusPublished

This text of 128 Cal. App. 779 (Rishebarger v. Stockwell-Kling Corp.) 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

Rishebarger v. Stockwell-Kling Corp., 128 Cal. App. 779 (Cal. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMPSON (IRA F.), J.

The facts in this case and the questions involved are identical with those in the case of Iske v. Stoclcwell-Kling Corp., ante, p. 192 [17 Pac. (2d) 203], this day filed, and for the reasons therein stated the appeal in this case is dismissed.

Works, P. J., and Stephens, J., pro tem., concurred.

A petition by appellant to have the cause heard in the Supreme Court, after judgment in the District Court of Appeal, was denied by the Supreme Court on February 9, 1933.

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

THOMPSON (IRA F.), J.

The facts in this case and the questions involved are identical with those in the case of Iske v. Stoclcwell-Kling Corp., ante, p. 192 [17 Pac. (2d) 203], this day filed, and for the reasons therein stated the appeal in this case is dismissed.

Works, P. J., and Stephens, J., pro tem., concurred.

A petition by appellant to have the cause heard in the Supreme Court, after judgment in the District Court of Appeal, was denied by the Supreme Court on February 9, 1933.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 Cal. App. 779, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rishebarger-v-stockwell-kling-corp-calctapp-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack