Legal Opinion

Baird v. Lindblad

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 29, 1946No. Civ. 7244PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, P. J.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover the sum of $1,294.80, which it is agreed is the unpaid balance due under a lease by which plaintiff (and her husband, since deceased) leased land to defendant for the growing of tomatoes. It is conceded that the total amount of the rental for the term of the lease was $3,850, upon which defendant paid, at different times, the total sum of $2,555.20, leaving an unpaid balance of $1,294.80. The lease which was dated March 10, 1944, was for a term of nine months from March 1, 1944. It was prepared by defendant, the lessee, upon a printed lease form, with…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Universal Sales Corp. v. California Press Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Union Sugar Co. v. Hollister Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Hunt v. United Bank & Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Estate of NorthcuttCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Lemm v. Stillwater Land & Cattle Co.California Supreme Court · 1933

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Sears, Roebuck and Company v. PolingSupreme Court of Iowa · 1957
  2. California Oregon Broadcasting, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  3. Lucas v. Quigley Motor Co.California Court of Appeal · 1961
  4. Lachman Bros. v. MuenzerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  5. Erich v. DunklyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API