Legal Opinion

Steigerwald v. Godwin

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 24, 1956No. Civ. 5189PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BURCH, J. pro tem. *

Plaintiff sues on a written contract to recover $5,243, the amount stipulated in the contract for the completion of the roofing work in new construction on school buildings in Lakeside, California. The defendant is the general contractor on said construction. Defendant’s answer admits the obligation on the contract and sets up a counterclaim for items of damage in the total sum of $1,671.59, which items were incurred in demolition work and otherwise following a destructive fire during the course of the construction work and were not covered by defendant’s insurance…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Wulfjen v. DoltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Bingham v. KearneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Kidd v. HillmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  4. Colorado Corp., Ltd. v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  5. Bernhard v. DelluaitanteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ferraro v. Southern California Gas Co.California Court of Appeal · 1980
  2. Travelers Indemnity Co. v. IngebretsenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
  3. Donohue v. Highlands Underwriters InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
  4. Shifrin v. McGuire & Hester Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1966
  5. Phillips v. Western Pacific RailroadCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API