Legal Opinion

Bettencourt v. Sheehy

California Supreme Court

Decided May 13, 1910No. S.F. No. 5303PublishedCited by 14 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtAngellotti, J.

This is an action by plaintiff, who conducts a grocery and merchandise store in Watsonville, against defendant, to recover the balance due on a running account for goods sold to him for one Kitagawa. There was found to he due plaintiff on this account the sum of $323.10, which included items aggregating $54.30 for wines and whisky sold to defendant for Kitigawa. None of said wine or whisky was .sold to be drunk on the store premises, and none of it was ■drunk there. It was sold in amounts of gallons and half gallons, being drawn from barrels into demijohns, and was all taken away from the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sharon v. SharonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  2. Barnes v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1876
  3. Keyes v. CyrusCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Beiser v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1887

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Keeler v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  2. Morse v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Motorola, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
  4. People v. RichardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
  5. Kahrs v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938

9 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