San Francisco Sulphur Co. v. Aetna Indemnity Co.

California Court of Appeal

San Francisco Sulphur Co. v. Aetna Indemnity Co.

106 P. 113, 11 Cal. App. 701, 1909 Cal. App. LEXIS 88

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 10, 1909

DocketCiv. No. 645

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 106 P. 113 (San Francisco Sulphur Co. v. Aetna Indemnity Co.) 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

San Francisco Sulphur Co. v. Aetna Indemnity Co., 106 P. 113, 11 Cal. App. 701, 1909 Cal. App. LEXIS 88 (Cal. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

KERRIGAN, J.

In the above-entitled cause it has been stipulated by the respective parties that the matters to be determined by this court are identical with the matters to be determined in the cause bearing the same title but numbered in the trial court No. 3619, ante, p. 695, [106 Pac. 111], and that the judgment of this court may be the same in both cases. In the case numbered in the trial court No. 3619 we have this day affirmed the judgment and order appealed from. It is therefore ordered in accordance with the aforesaid stipulation that in the ease numbered No. 11 in the trial court, the judgment and order are affirmed.

Hall, J., and Cooper, P. J., concurred.

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

KERRIGAN, J.

In the above-entitled cause it has been stipulated by the respective parties that the matters to be determined by this court are identical with the matters to be determined in the cause bearing the same title but numbered in the trial court No. 3619, ante, p. 695, [106 Pac. 111], and that the judgment of this court may be the same in both cases. In the case numbered in the trial court No. 3619 we have this day affirmed the judgment and order appealed from. It is therefore ordered in accordance with the aforesaid stipulation that in the ease numbered No. 11 in the trial court, the judgment and order are affirmed.

Hall, J., and Cooper, P. J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 P. 113, 11 Cal. App. 701, 1909 Cal. App. LEXIS 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/san-francisco-sulphur-co-v-aetna-indemnity-co-calctapp-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack