Legal Opinion
Mattco Forge, Inc. v. Arthur Young & Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 7, 1997No. B087488PublishedCited by 101 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*825Opinion
KLEIN, P. J.
Appellants and cross-respondents Arthur Young & Company, Richard E. Lamping, Thomas W. Blumer and Ernst & Young (collectively Arthur Young) appeal the judgment following jury verdicts in favor of respondent Mattco Forge, Inc. (Mattco).1
Because of prejudicial instructional error, the judgment is reversed, except for the award for out-of-pocket expenses and the interest thereon.
Cross-appellant Mateo Minguez (Minguez), owner of Mattco, appeals the judgment upon the granting of a directed verdict in favor of Arthur Young, which judgment is affirmed.
Background Information
This…
2Cases cited61 opinions
- Precision Instrument Manufacturing Co. v. Automotive Maintenance MacHinery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Soule v. General Motors Corp.California Supreme Court · 1994
- Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman's Fund Ins. CompaniesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- In Re Marriage of BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Budd v. NixenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by101 opinions
- Viner v. SweetCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. Christina N.California Court of Appeal · 2005
- Carver v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2002
- Wershba v. Apple Computer, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2001
- Horn v. Cushman & Wakefield Western, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1999
96 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.