1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.App.4th
  4. 12 Cal.App.4th
  5. 12 Cal.App.4th 1848 (1993)
 

LILIENTHAL & FOWLER v. SUPERIOR COURT

Docket No. A058440.

12 Cal.App.4th 1848 (1993)

16 Cal. Rptr.2d 458

LILIENTHAL & FOWLER et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Respondent; RODNEY KARR et al., Real Parties in Interest.

Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Two.

February 5, 1993.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

COUNSEL

Phillips, Greenberg, Dolven & Strain and Jerry R. Hauser for Petitioners.

No appearance for Respondent.

Joseph M. Lynn for Real Parties in Interest.

OPINION

BENSON, J.

The issue raised by this petition for writ of mandate is whether the trial court may refuse to rule on the merits of a summary adjudication motion made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (f), when such an adjudication would not dispose of an entire cause of action because two separate and distinct wrongful acts are combined in the same cause of action.1 We...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases