Cull v. San Francisco & Fresno Land Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County and from an order denying a new trial. J. R. Webb, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
BRITT, C.
Plaintiff alleged in his complaint that defendant employed him to summer fallow certain land, between four hundred and five hundred acres in area, and to plow and sow in wheat another parcel of eighty acres, both tracts being the property of defendant; he prayed judgment for the alleged value of such services. By its answer defendant denied that plaintiff did any of said work under its employment.
As nearly as we can ascertain from the evidence in the record the following facts appeared at the trial, without conflict; For several years next prior to and including the' cropping season…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Taylor v. . BradleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1868
- Dickinson v. . HartNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Walls v. PrestonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
3Cited by3 opinions
- James v. JamesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1912
- Pace v. BeckettSupreme Court of Colorado · 1917
- Watson v. BorcovichCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939