Abner Doble Co. v. Keystone Consol. Mining Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Jesse W. Lilienthal, and Frohman & Jacobs, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.
The plaintiff corporation sued the defendant corporation for the sum of $1,527.29 as a balance due for work, material, and money which it furnished said defendant.
The bill of particulars furnished by the plaintiff to the defendant on its demand showed charges amounting to $8,094.27 and credits for cash and allowances of $6,566.98, leaving as a balance the amount sued for.
In the answer and cross-complaint filed by the defendant it is claimed that the charges in the bill of particulars aggregating $4,752.93 were made for reconstructing and transforming the compressor at the Keystone Mine, and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Daggett v. GrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Vance v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Cohen v. KnoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Schenck v. Hartford Fire InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
3Cited by18 opinions
- Spreckels v. GorrillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- May v. FarrellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Slaughter v. Goldberg, Bowen & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1915
- Employees' Participating Assn. v. PineCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Webb v. JonesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.