Orton

Orton v. Daigler

Good Law
120 Cal. App. 448·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 32·8 P.2d 161
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 4, 1932Docket No. 7969.California523 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Fricke, J.

Prior to the present action appellant and respondent E. L. Daigler were joined as defendants in a condemnation suit filed by the city of Los Angeles by reason of their being, respectively, the landlord and tenant of a piece of real property a portion of which was sought to be condemned. It appears that the report of the referees as confirmed by the court in the condemnation suit fixed the value of the leasehold interest of respondent Daigler as $829,” and that the Superior Court of Los Angeles County by its order authorized the city of Los Angeles to pay this-amount into the hands of the clerk of said court. Thereafter appellant brought this action for declaratory relief under section 1060 of the Code of Civil Procedure to determine the right to said deposit and for a judgment awarding eaid sum to appellant. The respondent E. L. Daigler interposed a demurrer to the complaint herein and also moved the court to direct the clerk to pay over to said respondent the said sum of $829. On March 17, 1931, the court ordered that the demurrer be sustained without leave to amend, and ordered that the motion be granted, and on March 23, 1931, made the following order:

Respondent has moved to…

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.