Legal Opinion

Kocher v. Cartman Tire Exchange

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 29, 1930No. Docket No. 7303PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.

As assignee the plaintiff sued to recover a judgment against the defendants on a claim for rubber tires. The defendants answered by denying the material allegations of the complaint and pleading a warranty made by the vendor. The trial court made findings in favor of the defendants and from a judgment thereon the plaintiff has appealed.

Among the findings so made by the trial court was one which was very broad, finding that the warranty was made, that it was breached and that the plaintiff might not recover. Plaintiff says that the finding is not supported by proper evidence. He calls to our…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Harrison v. McCormickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Germain Fruit Co. v. J. K. Armsby Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Kreuzberger v. WingfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Joseph v. HoltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
  5. Campion v. DowneyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. C9 Ventures v. SVC-West, L.P.California Court of Appeal · 2012
  2. India Paint and Lacquer Co. v. United Steel Prod. Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1954
  3. Encore Glass, Inc. v. Anchor Glass Container Corp. (In Re Anchor Glass Container Corp.)District Court, M.D. Florida · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API