Hale v. Bohannon
38 Cal.2d 458 (Cal. 1952) Cited 88 timesIn Hale v. Bohannon, 38 Cal.2d 458, 474 [ 241 P.2d 4], the Supreme Court reaffirmed its approval of the holding in Bohn that as to foreign corporations which complied with former Civ. Code § 405 such corporations were placed on the same footing under the California Constitution with respect to the applicability of section 395. (See also Ellis v. National Casualty Co., 99 Cal.App.2d 77, 79 [ 221 P.2d 127].)
Jhirmack Enterprises, Inc. v. Superior Court
96 Cal.App.3d 715 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979) Cited 7 timesDocket No. 55939. September 5, 1979. COUNSEL Gibson, Dunn Crutcher, Frederick R. Wirtz, Cavalletto, Webster, Mullen McCaughey and Richard C. Whiston for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Griffith Thornburgh and Eric R. Van de Water for Real Parties in Interest. OPINION KINGSLEY, J. Pursuant to section 400 of the Code of Civil Procedure, petitioner seeks review of an order of respondent court, denying its motion for change of venue. We grant the peremptory writ. Petitioner is a California
Anaheim Extrusion Co. v. Superior Court
170 Cal.App.3d 1201 (Cal. Ct. App. 1985)Docket No. G002788. July 11, 1985. COUNSEL Kadison, Pfaelzer, Woodard, Quinn Rossi, J. David Oswalt, Lawrence A. Cox and Barry B. Kaufman for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Glen H. Schwartz for Real Party in Interest. OPINION TROTTER, P.J. Anaheim Extrusion Company challenges respondent's order granting Classic Molding Company's motion for a change of venue, as well as the order granting Classic's request for reasonable expenses and attorneys fees. Anaheim filed a complaint against real