Legal Opinion

Ford v. Bushard

California Supreme Court

Decided March 12, 1897No. L. A. No. 169PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County and from an order denying a new trial. J. W. McKinley, Judge, The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

Searls, C.

This action was brought June 16, 1894, by H. A. Ford and Edwin Clark to recover damages from J. J. Bushard and Joseph Mesmer for the violation of a written contract entered into by said defendants with the plaintiffs on September 11, 1890, for the sale and delivery by defendants to plaintiffs of say two thousand budded orange trees; five hundred thereof to be of the variety named Mediterranean Sweets and the remainder Washington Navels.

Plaintiffs claimed that, excepting a small number, the trees delivered were not of the varieties named in the contract.

Defendants answered…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Murdock v. BrooksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
  2. Read v. BuffumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Campbell v. WestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Smith v. CurtisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Dougherty v. California Kettleman Oil Royalties, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Cockerell v. Title Insurance & Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Emerald Bay Community Ass'n v. Golden Eagle InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  4. Crary v. KurtzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
  5. Anglin v. ConwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953

7 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