Legal Opinion
Spence v. Omnibus Industries
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 29, 1975No. Civ. 13808PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
GARDNER, P. J.
Plaintiffs, husband and wife, are home owners. Defendant corporation is a building contractor specializing in remodeling. Plaintiffs and Defendants entered into a contract by the terms of which defendants were to do certain remodeling of plaintiffs’ home. The contract was provided by defendant. It was a standardized document. On its face is a description of the work to be done and the price to be paid. On the reverse side are certain printed “terms and conditions.” Paragraph 30 of these “terms and conditions” provides for arbitration in accordance with the rulés of the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Neal v. State Farm Insurance CompaniesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- Case v. Kadota Fig Ass'n of ProducersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Lesser Towers, Inc. v. Roscoe-Ajax Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1969
- Bertero v. Superior Court of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Berman v. Renart Sportswear Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1963
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- People v. ProctorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- Wheeler v. St. Joseph HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- William Waggoner v. Robert Lee DallaireCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Brock v. Kaiser Foundation HospitalsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- DIAL 800 v. FesbinderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.