Case ID: cal-app-2d_148/html/0972-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "DOOLING, Acting P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

307 P.2d 378]
    [Civ. No. 16987.
    First Dist., Div. Two.
    Feb. 26, 1957.]
    ANN ROUSSEAU, Appellant, v. CYRIL R. TOBIN et al., Respondents.
    Ann Bousseau, in pro. per., for Appellant.
    Tobin & Tobin and John J. Hopkins for Respondents.
   DOOLING, Acting P. J.

This case is similar to Rousseau v. O’Gara, No. 17019, ante, p. 676 [307 P.2d 376], this day decided. Respondents are attorneys who represented parties adverse to appellant in the prior action, Rousseau v. Hurtado, 122 Cal.App.2d 705 [265 P.2d 580], The amended complaint contains allegations similar to those found in the O’Gara case. Respondents’ demurrer to appellant’s amended complaint was sustained without leave to amend. For the reasons given in our opinion in that case the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Kaufman, J., and Draper, J. pro tem., concurred.

Appellant’s petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied April 25, 1957. 
      
      Assigned by Chairman of Judicial Council.