Legal Opinion
Parnell v. Stanfield
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 30, 1955No. Civ. No. 5147PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGriffin, Acting P. J.
It is conceded that the factual background and contentions made on this appeal are fairly set forth in a written opinion of the learned trial judge. We therefore adopt certain portions thereof and excerpts therefrom as appear from the record before us.
In 1953 defendant, appellant and cross-complainant Stan-field, a general contractor, entered into a contract with defendant La Mesa-Spring Valley School District (hereinafter referred to as the school district) to construct certain buildings known as Lake Murray Elementary School. It consisted of various distinct units. Plaintiffs, respondents…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Burns v. PetersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- Body-Steffner Co. v. Flotill Products, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1944
- Schmidt v. MacCo Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1953
- Granger v. New Jersey InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Tide Water Associated Oil Co. v. CurtinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Monolith Portland Cement Company, a Corporation v. Douglas Oil Company of California, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962
- Brand v. ManorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955