§Why CasetextPricing

Response Reply

undefined

6 Cited authorities

  1. Greyhound Corp. v. Superior Court

    56 Cal.2d 355 (Cal. 1961)   Cited 291 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Greyhound, the plaintiff in a personal injury suit arising from a car accident sought written statements that had been obtained from witnesses by the defendant's insurance adjusters and investigators.

  2. Flagship Theatres of Palm Desert, LLC v. Century Theatres, Inc.

    198 Cal.App.4th 1366 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 30 times
    Noting federal law's antitrust injury requirement applies to claims under the Cartwright Act

  3. Emerson Elec. Co. v. Superior Court

    16 Cal.4th 1101 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 32 times   3 Legal Analyses

    Docket No. S057119. December 1, 1997. Appeal from Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. MC006881, Ross Amspoker, Temporary Judge. Pursuant to California Constitution, article VI, section 21. COUNSEL Hennelly Grossfeld, John J. Hennelly and Susan J. Williams for Petitioners. Hugh F. Young, Jr., Jan S. Amundson, Harvey M. Grossman, Sherman Joyce, Crowell Moring, Victor E. Schwartz, Mark A. Behrens, Nabil W. Istafanous, D. Dudley Oldham, Pepper, Hamilton Scheetz, Alfred W. Cortese, Jr., Kathleen

  4. Glenfed Dev. Corp. v. Superior Court

    53 Cal.App.4th 1113 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 19 times

    Docket No. B108546. March 27, 1997. Appeal from Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. BC131389, Frances Rothschild, Judge. COUNSEL Cox, Castle Nicholson, Jeffrey D. Masters and Mark Moore for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Horvitz Levy, Peter Abrahams, Andrea M. Gauthier, Murtaugh, Miller, Meyer Nelson, Bradford H. Miller and Gregory M. Heuser for Real Party in Interest. OPINION VOGEL (Miriam A.), J. — BACKGROUND Several lawsuits alleging construction defects were filed against Glenfed

  5. Norton v. Superior Court

    24 Cal.App.4th 1750 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994)   Cited 20 times
    Holding that evidence of a plaintiff's insurance coverage may be discoverable if admissible, which it surely would be in cases involving the Howell rule

  6. Associated Brewers Distr. Co. v. Superior Court

    65 Cal.2d 583 (Cal. 1967)   Cited 27 times
    In Associated Brewers Distributing Co. v. Superior Court, supra, plaintiff sued to recover a specific sum allegedly due for goods sold and delivered.