Court Opinion

ID: 9605950
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 02:43:55.282443+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:38:44.785130
License: Public Domain

SCHAUER, J.
I concur in the majority judgment and opinion here in accord with the same principle of appellate procedure which required my dissents in Isenberg v. California Emp. Stab. Com. (1947), 30 Cal.2d 34, 47-48 [180 P.2d 11] ; Union Oil Co. v. Union Sugar Co. (1948), ante, pp. 300, 319, et seq. [188 P.2d 470]; Estate of Smith (1948), ante, pp. 563, 569-572 [191 P.2d 413]; Adoption of Parker (1948), ante, pp. 608, 617-619 [191 P.2d 420]. To record *853continuity of reference and consistency of position it seems proper to point out that the majority opinion here, in the rule it applies, is consistent with the dissents and inconsistent with the majority opinions in the eases cited.
Appellant’s petition for a rehearing was denied June 10, 1948.