Ramish v. Workman
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Williams, Goudge & Chandler, I. Henry Harris, and Daniel M. Hunsaker, for Appellants.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
This controversy grew out of a lease of property made by plaintiff to defendants Workman and Sturm and their assignors, for a term of ten years, for the sum of one hundred and eighty thousand dollars, payable in advance in monthly installments of one thousand five hundred dollars.
Default was made in the payment of the rent due December 1, 1912, whereupon plaintiff instituted a proceeding in unlawful detainer for restitution of the property and recovery of the rent then due for said month, for which judgment was rendered on January 31, 1913, pursuant to which, notwithstanding an appeal…
2Cited by21 opinions
- Hartke v. AbbottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Curtis v. ArnoldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Wetzler v. PattersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- Matter of Escondido West TravelodgeDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1985
- A-1 Garage v. Lange Investment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1935
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.