Hodgkins v. Dunham
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChipman, P. J.
This is an action to recover the price agreed to be paid for a certain stallion and also damages for alleged fraudulent representations as to the reproductive potency of the horse. The cause was tried by the court without a jury and plaintiff had judgment, from which defendants appeal on bill of exceptions.
In the amended complaint it is averred: That defendants are nonresidents of this state and were copartners whose business was that of “importing and breeding of draft stock and sale of stallions for breeding purposes,” and that plaintiff is engaged “in breeding draft and driving stock and…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Southern Development Co. v. SilvaSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Schmidt v. MesmerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Feeney v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- N. C. Antle & Bro. v. SextonIllinois Supreme Court · 1891
- Newman v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Gagne v. BertranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- French v. FreemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Harding v. RobinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Anderson v. ThacherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Berard Construction Co. v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.