Legal Opinion

Schnitman v. Husted

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 29, 1929No. Docket No. 6824PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKoford, P. J.

Plaintiff and defendants are, respectively, successors in interest of the lessee and lessors under a lease of real property in San Francisco. The lease provided for a renewal term of ten years without definitely fixing the amount of rental for such renewal term. The parties being unable to agree upon the amount and the arbitration provided for in the lease having failed, the plaintiff brought this action in the Superior Court and had the court fix by judgment the amount of rent to be paid under the terms of the lease during the renewal term. The defendants appeal from the judgment claiming…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Pringle v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Miller Cattle Co. v. MatticeArizona Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Schwartz v. SchwartzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API