Legal Opinion

Miller & Lux, Inc. v. San Joaquin Light & Power Corp.

California Supreme Court

Decided March 11, 1937No. L. A. No. 15252PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.

This is the third time this ease has been before the reviewing courts. On the first, occasion, 120 Cal. App. 589 [8 Pac. (2d) 560], the question presented was whether the court had erred in sustaining a demurrer to the answer of the defendant. It was held that the demurrer was improperly sustained as to several of the separate defenses, but was properly sustained as to several others. On the second occasion, 136 Cal. App. 493 [29 Pac. (2d) 296], the appeal was from a judgment after trial. The appellate court determined that the trial court had misconstrued the contract involved herein, and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Tulare Irrigation District v. Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Peabody v. City of VallejoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Gin S. Chow v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Burr v. MacLay Rancho Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. Miller & Lux, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1920

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. City of Pasadena v. City of AlhambraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Joslin v. Marin Municipal Water DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Rank v. (Krug) United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1956
  4. Orange County Water District v. City of RiversideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Los Angeles Brick & Clay Products Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943

5 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