Discovery
Civ-Pro
Case Summary |
|
1819 REVIEW DENIED In reversing a judgment based on a stipulated reversal, the First District suggested that the Supreme Court reconsider its ruling in Neary, and in a dissenting opinion, Presiding Justice Kline said that he would never grant a stipulated reversal unless specifically directed to do so by the Supreme Court.CitationMORROW v HOOD (Stipulated Reversal) 59 CA4 924 [See: Neary v Regents 3 C4 273, T/AT 10/92; Auto Equity Sales v Superior Court 57 C2 450] |
|
|
|||||
|
|||||
Finz Case Law Summaries (Finz Advance Tapes)
|
|||||
Copyright by Pincus Legal Education, Inc. ©1992 - 2022
|
|||||