Legal Opinion
Crowther v. Metalite Manufacturing Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 27, 1933No. Docket No. 4725PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TUTTLE, J., pro tem.
In this action plaintiff recovered judgment in the sum of $456.92 upon a complaint based upon the breach of a contract to manufacture .pouring spouts. The appeal is brought here and presented upon the judgment-roll alone.
It is the contention of appellant that the judgment is outside the issues and void, under the authority of Baar v. Smith, 201 Cal. 87 [255 Pac. 827], and other cases.
The complaint alleged that plaintiff and defendant entered into a contract according to the terms of which the defendant agreed to manufacture for the plaintiff certain Tip Top pouring spouts…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Windsor v. McVeighSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Baar v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
- Poledori v. NewmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Suisun Lumber Co. v. Fairfield School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
- Naugle v. NaugleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1913
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Boro v. RuzichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- First Trust & Savings Bank v. WardenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Hatch v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Gallatin v. MarkowitzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Caviglia v. JarvisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.