Legal Opinion
Stanchfield v. Hamer Toyota, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 25, 1995No. B082481PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BRANDLIN, J. *
On August 5,1991, plaintiff Philip Stanchfield filed suit against Hamer Toyota, Inc., and other defendants (referred to collectively as Hamer Toyota) seeking damages for breach of an employment agreement and specific performance of a stock purchase agreement. His complaint also included other causes of action which are not pertinent here.
The matter proceeded to trial on September 15,1993. At the conclusion of the evidence, appellant moved for a directed verdict on his breach of contract cause of action, urging he had been summarily discharged on August 9, 1990, without…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- People v. McCaughanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.California Supreme Court · 1970
- Zellerino v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- People v. FarleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- Kaneko v. OkudaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Boston v. Penny Lane Centers, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2009
- Plunkett v. SpauldingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- West v. Bechtel Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2002
- Martin v. Santa Clara Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Alexander v. Community Hospital of Long BeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.