Legal Opinion

Meyer & Holler v. Ramona Village

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 29, 1935No. Civ. 8788PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHINN, J., pro tem.

Defendants appeal from a. judgment rendered against Ramona Village, a corporation, and against defendants Callahan and Boos, as stockholders thereof, in an action to recover compensation for architectural services.

Plaintiff’s employment was under a written contract in the form of a proposal made to and accepted by defendant corporation. The provisions of the contract upon which the judgment was founded and which are material on this appeal are as follows: “We will prepare preliminary plans for said building and submit them to you for your approval and upon your approval…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Coombes v. GetzSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Domenigoni v. Imperial Live Stock & Mortgage Co.California Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Denigan v. San Francisco Savings UnionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Stewart v. EngelbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Charles E. Hoppe, Trustee of the Estate of Los Gatos Lumber Products, Inc., Bankrupt v. Emmet L. RittenhouseCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1960
  2. Crane Valley Land Co. v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  3. Crestlawn Memorial Park Assn. v. SobieskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  4. Schroeter v. Bartlett Syndicate Building Corp.California Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Estate of Fortunato v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2010

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API