Teitelbaum Furs, Inc. v. Dominion Insurance

Good Law
1964 Cal. App. LEXIS 779·231 Cal. App. 2d 80·41 Cal. Rptr. 597
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 7, 1964Civ. No. 27371California553 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Richards, J.

Appeal by plaintiff corporations from that portion of a judgment awarding defendants costs of suit and costs of appeal against Albert Teitelbaum, individually, who is not a party to the action.

*81 In this action to recover under contracts of insurance for losses allegedly arising out of a robbery, the jury returned a verdict for plaintiffs. The trial court granted defendants’ motion for new trial and denied defendants ’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Plaintiffs appealed from the order granting a new trial and defendants appealed from the judgment. The Supreme Court reversed the order granting a new trial and directed the trial court to enter judgment for defendants. (Teitelbaum, Furs, Inc. v. Dominion Ins. Co., Ltd., 58 Cal.2d 601, 607 [ 25 Cal.Rptr. 559 , 375 P.2d 439 ].) The opinion of the Supreme Court concludes with this statement: “Defendants shall recover their costs on these appeals. ’ ’

Thereafter defendants moved for entry of judgment in accordance with the opinion and remittitur and further moved “to include as a person against whom judgment for costs shall be entered Mr. Albert Teitelbaum.” Defendants also filed a memorandum of costs on appeal…

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.