LE DUC v. BLUMENTHAL (1938)

Supreme Court of California.

Hazel LE DUC, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Maurice BLUMENTHAL et al., Defendants; Maurice Blumenthal et al., Appellants.
Joseph G. SAUCEDO and Minnie Saucedo, Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. Maurice BLUMENTHAL et al., Defendants; Maurice Blumenthal et al., Appellants.
George A. ROLLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Maurice BLUMENTHAL et al., Defendants; Maurice Blumenthal et al., Appellants.

L. A. 16666 to 16668.

Decided: July 19, 1938

R. D. McLaughlin, Walter I. Lyon, Walter T. Casey, and Albert Lee Casey, all of Los Angeles, for appellants. Don L. Gilman and Entenza & Gramer, all of Los Angeles, for respondents.

These three cases are companion cases to McNeil v. Blumenthal, Cal.Sup., 81 P.2d 566, this day decided. They are before this court on motion of plaintiffs to dismiss the appeal of defendants from an order of the trial court granting relief pursuant to section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure, or to affirm the order. The question presented is identical with that determined in the McNeil Case. Therefore, on that authority, the respective orders appealed from in these three cases are, and each of them is, hereby affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law