Pulido

Pulido v. Reaver CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 10, 2013E055655California2,167 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 10/10/13 Pulido v. Reaver CA4/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

ALBERTO PULIDO,

Plaintiff and Appellant, E055655

v. (Super.Ct.No. RIC396282)

DAVID REAVER et al., OPINION

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Stephen D. Cunnison,

Judge. (Retired judge of the Riverside Super. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant

to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Reversed.

Robert Mann and Donald W. Cook for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Klute & Newton and Edward Wallace Dingman for Defendants and Respondents.

1 This case presents the question of whether plaintiff was required to proffer…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.