§Why CasetextPricing

To Opposition To Motion

Reply

4 Cited authorities

  1. Leader v. Health Industries of America, Inc.

    89 Cal.App.4th 603 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 282 times
    Upholding the trial court's ordering the dismissal of the action after striking a complaint without leave to amend

  2. Desny v. Wilder

    46 Cal.2d 715 (Cal. 1956)   Cited 251 times   4 Legal Analyses
    In Desny, the California Supreme Court recognized that a writer and producer form an implied contract under circumstances where both understand that the writer is disclosing his idea on the condition that he will be compensated if it is used. 299 P.2d at 270.

  3. Morgan v. Superior Court

    172 Cal.App.2d 527 (Cal. Ct. App. 1959)   Cited 33 times

    Docket No. 23960. July 31, 1959. PROCEEDING in mandamus to compel the Superior Court of Los Angeles County to permit the filing of an amendment to a divorce complaint. Writ granted. Butterworth Smith for Petitioner. Harold W. Kennedy, County Counsel, and William E. Lamoreaux, Assistant County Counsel, for Respondents. Miller, Vandegrift, Middleton Sackin for Real Party in Interest. NOURSE, J. pro tem.[fn*] [fn*] Assigned by Chairman of Judicial Council. Petitioner is the plaintiff in an action for

  4. Guidery v. Green

    95 Cal. 630 (Cal. 1892)   Cited 48 times
    In Guidery v. Green, 95 Cal. 630, 633, 30 P. 786, 787, the court said: 'It can very rarely happen that a court will be justified in refusing a party leave to amend his pleading so that he may properly present his case * * *.' The same language is repeated in Crosby v. Clark, 132 Cal. 1, 8, 63 P. 1022, and in Carter v. Lothian, 133 Cal. 451, 452, 65 P. 962.