Legal Opinion

Lindner v. Friednash

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 15, 1958No. Civ. 22533PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PATROSSO, J. pro tem. *

Plaintiff as assignee of the Village Winery, Inc., instituted this action to recover from defendant the balance of the purchase price of 50,000 gallons of wine allegedly sold and delivered by said assignor to the defendant. Judgment was rendered in favor of the defendant and plaintiff appeals. Throughout this opinion we shall refer to the assignor as plaintiff or simply as “winery.” There is no substantial dispute with respect to the facts. Plaintiff was a processor of wine, having its place of business at Escalón, California. One Perenchio was a wine broker in Los…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Nelson v. AbrahamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Sime v. MaloufCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  3. Campagna v. Market Street Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Grant v. WeatherholtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Hansen v. BurfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Smalley v. BakerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  2. Gardiner v. GaitherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  3. Epstein v. StahlCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. Nels E. Nelson, Inc. v. TarmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
  5. Deicher v. CorkeryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962

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

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

Powered by the Exa API