From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pamela Lee B. v. Hayden

Supreme Court of California
Feb 23, 1995
38 Cal. Rptr. 2d 345 (Cal. 1995)

Opinion


Page __

__ Cal.4th __ 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 345, 889 P.2d 539 PAMELA LEE B., Respondent, v. David HAYDEN et al., Appellants. No. S041035. Supreme Court of California Feb. 23, 1995

         Prior report: Cal.App., 31 Cal.Rptr.2d 147.

         Pursuant to rule 29.4(c), California Rule of Court, the above-entitled review is dismissed and cause is remanded to the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One.

         [38 Cal.Rptr.2d 346] [ 889 P.2d 540] LUCAS, C.J., and MOSK, ARABIAN, BAXTER, GEORGE and WERDEGAR, JJ., concur.

         KENNARD, J., is of the opinion review should not be dismissed.


Summaries of

Pamela Lee B. v. Hayden

Supreme Court of California
Feb 23, 1995
38 Cal. Rptr. 2d 345 (Cal. 1995)
Case details for

Pamela Lee B. v. Hayden

Case Details

Full title:PAMELA LEE B., Respondent, v. David HAYDEN et al., Appellants.

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Feb 23, 1995

Citations

38 Cal. Rptr. 2d 345 (Cal. 1995)
889 P.2d 539

Citing Cases

State v. Mullins

The California Court of Appeal held that this allocation of fault was irrational: .31 Cal.Rptr.2d 147, 149–50…

State v. Mullins

The California Court of Appeal held that this allocation of fault was irrational: 31 Cal. Rptr. 2d 147,…