From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bailley v. All Persons

Court of Appeal of California, First District
Jun 15, 1912
19 Cal.App. 274 (Cal. Ct. App. 1912)

Opinion

Civ. No. 1025.

June 15, 1912.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. James M. Seawell, Judge.

The facts are similar to those stated in the opinion of the court in Bagley v. Bloom, ante, p. 255.

John Hubert Mee, for Appellant.

F. O'Callaghan, and George A. Connolly, for Respondent.


The questions involved herein are the same as those in the case of Bagley v. Bloom et al. (No. 1041), ante, p. 255, [ 125 P. 931], decided this day, and, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed therein, the judgment is affirmed.

Lennon, P. J., and Kerrigan, J., concurred.

A petition to have the cause heard in the supreme court, after judgment in the district court of appeal, was denied by the supreme court on August 14, 1912.


Summaries of

Bailley v. All Persons

Court of Appeal of California, First District
Jun 15, 1912
19 Cal.App. 274 (Cal. Ct. App. 1912)
Case details for

Bailley v. All Persons

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS E. BAILLEY, Respondent, v. ALL PERSONS, etc., Defendants; MARY C…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, First District

Date published: Jun 15, 1912

Citations

19 Cal.App. 274 (Cal. Ct. App. 1912)
125 P. 939