Skip to main content
· 3/20/1968

Weisbart v. Flohr

Citations

  • 260 Cal. App. 2d 281
  • 67 Cal. Rptr. 114
  • 1968 Cal. App. LEXIS 1854

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • counsel’s repeated use of numerous props during closing arguments constituted improper “diversionary exercise” that created circus-like atmosphere in courtroom

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Conley

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.