Balfour v. Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County, and from an order denying a new trial. E. W. Bisley, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court in this case, and more fully upon the former appeal, reported in 109 Cal. 221.
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
This appeal is from a judgment and from an order refusing a new trial. It is the second appeal in the case. The first was taken by the plaintiff and will be found reported in Balfour v. Fresno Canal Co., 109 Cal. 221, where a more detailed statement of the facts can be found than is deemed important here. The language of the contract is there stated, and it was determined that such language was fairly susceptible of two constructions, without doing violence to its usual and ordinary import on any established rule of construction, and that, therefore, there was an ambiguity to explain which it…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bennett v. . JudsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Gribble v. Columbus Brewing Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
- Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. DunbarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
3Cited by15 opinions
- Montecito Valley Water Co. v. City of Santa BarbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Perpetual Building & Loan Ass'n v. United States Fidelity & Guarantee Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Lowe v. Yolo Cty. Consol. Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
- George v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Kaufmann v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.