Legal Opinion
Reely v. Chapman
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 20, 1960No. Civ. 6250PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MONROE, J. pro tem. *
In 1955 the plaintiff, who was a manufacturer’s representative, entered into a contract with the defendants to act as wholesaler in the sale and distribution of water ski-belts manufactured by defendants. The contract provided that it might be extended to the end of 1956, and in accordance therewith it was so extended. On January 3, 1957, plaintiff and defendant D. C. Chapman had a conversation concerning further representation of the defendants by plaintiff. There is a hopeless conflict in the testimony as to what occurred. The plaintiff contended that it was agreed that…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Rabin v. CraftCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Preszler v. DudleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Fuqua v. ThomasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Easton, Eldrige & Co. v. MillingtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Ernst v. GanahlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Magna Development Co. v. ReedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Varni Bros. Corp. v. Wine World, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1995
- Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1999