Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)

Citation: Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Parent Document: Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Jurisdiction: California (state)
Effective Date: 2011-06-27
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5810370/wallace-v-mccubbin/ ↗

Other Sections in This Document (190)

Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Wallace v. McCubbin, 196 Cal. App. 4th 1169 (2011)
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425
Section 425

Full Text

441 chars

Also in October 2007, McCubbin and Merck filed a complaint with Animal Control, reporting that Nemo, “incorrectly referred to as an X-large Great *1177Dane,” was a “vicious and dangerous” dog. In late October 2007, Animal Control notified Wallace that there would be a hearing to determine whether Nemo should be killed. Wallace and Owen believe that Nemo has never damaged the apartment unit, growled, barked at, bitten, or attacked anyone.