Boehm v. Spreckels
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Wm. M. Abbott, Wm. M. Cannon, Kingsley Cannon, Fabius T. Finch, Paul F. Fratessa and George B. Keane for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
In the court below a demurrer to the complaint was sustained and judgment was thereupon given for the defendant. The plaintiffs appeal.
The plaintiffs are the assignees of all the rights of one James Shepherd to recover damages under a contract made between Shepherd and Spreckels on September 1, 1903. Spreckels was at that time the owner of the “San Francisco Call,” a morning newspaper of general circulation in San Francisco, which had been published and circulated therein for more than forty years prior to said date. For the more convenient transaction of the business the city of San…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Hunt v. Rousmanier's AdministratorsSupreme Court of the United States · 1823
- Pierce v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Willcox & Gibbs Sewing MacHine Co. v. EwingSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Frink v. RoeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Brown v. Crown Gold Milling Co.California Supreme Court · 1907
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Vernon Chappell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1959
- Elevator Operators & Starters' Union v. NewmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Davis v. JacobyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Roth v. MoellerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Olschewski v. HudsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.