gno.law

Roche v. McColgan

California Court of Appeal · Civ. No. 7342 · 1947-07-25 · Published · 80 Cal. App. 2d 983

Area
civil

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

80 Cal.App.2d 983 (1947) THEO. J. ROCHE, Appellant, v. CHARLES J. McCOLGAN, as State Franchise Tax Commissioner, Respondent.

Civ. No. 7342. California Court of Appeals. Third Dist.

July 25, 1947. Sullivan, Roche, Johnson & Farraher and Eustace Cullinan for Appellant.

Fred N. Howser, Attorney General, and James E. Sabine, Deputy Attorney General, for Respondent.

THE COURT.

It appears from the stipulation of the parties that the same legal questions are presented in this proceeding as those in Cullinan v. McColgan, 3 Civ. No. 7341, ante, page 976 [183 P.2d 115], this day filed.

For the reasons stated in our opinion in that case the judgment herein is affirmed.

Cites, in this corpus