Legal Opinion

Kuhn v. Gottfried

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 26, 1951No. Civ. 17790PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WHITE, P. J.—

Plaintiffs herein sought the cancellation of a $5,000 promissory note secured by a chattel mortgage given as payment for the purchase price of defendant’s medical practice. Defendant cross-complained for collection of the note, foreclosure of the chattel mortgage and for reimbursement for expenditures allegedly made on plaintiffs’ behalf. Because Mrs. Kuhn participated in only a minor way in the transaction, reference hereafter to “plaintiff” or “respondent” should be understood to mean plaintiff and respondent Dr. Orta E. Kuhn. The case was tried before the court without a jury,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Hansen v. Bear Film Co.California Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Peri v. L.A. Junction Ry.California Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Rogers v. WardenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Bechtold v. Bishop & Co., Inc.California Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Winning v. Board of Dental ExaminersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Lingsch v. SavageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  2. Sills v. Los Angeles Transit LinesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Reed v. KingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  4. Newman v. Los Angeles Transit LinesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  5. Uyemura v. WickHawaii Supreme Court · 1976

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

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

Powered by the Exa API