Lamb v. Otto
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.
The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant to recover damages for an alleged breach of warranty. A trial was had in the lower court and at the end of the plaintiff’s case the defendant moved ■for a nonsuit. The motion was granted, judgment was entered for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed under section 953a of the Code of Civil Procedure. At the time the motion was granted the trial court had received considerable parol evidence on the issue as to what warranties, if any, were made. Such evidence was introduced over the objection and exception of the respondent. If the…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Kellogg Bridge Co. v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Barnard v. KelloggSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- United Iron Works v. Outer Harbor Dock & Wharf Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
- Germain Fruit Co. v. J. K. Armsby Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
- Peterson v. ChaixCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Moore v. SwitzerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1925
- Drumar Mining Co. v. Morris Ravine Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1939
- Regula v. GerberTuscarawas County Court of Common Pleas · 1946
- First National Bank v. PetersonIdaho Supreme Court · 1929
- Williams v. LowenthalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.