United California Bank v. Maltzman United California Bank v. Maltzman

United California Bank v. Maltzman

1974.CA.40022 44 CAL. APP. 3D 41; 118 CAL. RPTR. 299

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

Petitioners Winzler & Kelly, a corporation, and John Winzler, individually, seek a writ of mandate compelling respondent court to grant any or all of the following of petitioners motions: Motion to compel execution, acknowledgment and filing of satisfaction of judgment or for an order ordering the entry of satisfaction of judgment without acknowledgment of satisfaction; motion to dismiss; motion for summary judgment. Alternatively petitioners seek a writ of mandate and/or prohibition commanding respondent court to desist and refrain from proceeding further with two superior court actions brought, respectively, by Leland Lipscomb and Thomas Reynolds (hereinafter referred to collectively as "plaintiffs") against petitioners Mercer-Fraser Co., a corporation (hereinafter "Mercer-Fraser"), Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District (hereinafter "Humboldt") and Winzler & Kelly and Kennedy Engineers, a joint venture (hereinafter the "Joint Venture"). When referred to collectively the defendants to said action will be designated as "defendants."

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1974
23 December
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
18
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
71.5
KB

More Books by Second Appellate District, Division Five Court of Appeal of California

Kazerouni v. Satnick Kazerouni v. Satnick
1991
People v. Harris People v. Harris
1991
People v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County People v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County
1991
People v. Keele People v. Keele
1986
In re Arlene Kimie Naito on Habeas Corpus In re Arlene Kimie Naito on Habeas Corpus
1986
People v. Hatcher People v. Hatcher
1995