Legal Opinion
Kushner v. Home Service Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 10, 1928No. Docket No. 6161PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
The following opinion was written hy Burroughs, justice pm tempore, and is adopted as the opinion of the court:
This is an action for damages claimed to have been suffered by plaintiff by reason of the alleged- violation of an implied covenant of a lease for quiet enjoyment.
The court found against the allegations of the complaint and denied plaintiff any relief.
It appears from the evidence that the defendant was the owner of a lease of the store property at 601% South Grand Avenue, in the city of Los Angeles. The lease provided that it was subject to cancellation upon five months’…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Brison v. BrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- California Southern Hotel Co. v. CallenderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Smith v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Baranov v. ScudderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Pedro v. PotterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Barkett v. BrucatoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Frittelli, Inc. v. 350 North Canon Drive, LPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Pierce v. NashCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Lee v. Placer Title Co.California Court of Appeal · 1994
- Trans Western Leasing Corp. v. Corrao Construction Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1982
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.