Legal Opinion
Commeford v. Baker
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 12, 1954No. Civ. 20202PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShinn, P. J.
In this action plaintiffs Commeford, Huisman, Matlock and Fortin recovered judgment against Harley H. Baker, Charlotte Baker, Aircraft Die Cutters and A.D.C. Plastics, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as defendants), in the sum of $8,823.33. They had sued for $45,359.54; defendants had filed a counterclaim for $80,934.09, upon which recovery was denied. The complaint contained two causes of action. Recovery was allowed on the first cause of action, which sought $9,599.54. As to the second cause of action which sought $35,760.50, a nonsuit was granted and plaintiffs’ motion to amend that cause of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Universal Sales Corp. v. California Press Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1942
- Walsh v. WalshCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Zinn v. Ex-Cell-O Corp.California Supreme Court · 1944
- Wachs v. WachsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Thacker v. American FoundryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Hudgins v. Neiman Marcus Group, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1995
- Koehl v. Verio, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
- Hunt v. SmythCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- Steinhebel v. Los Angeles Times CommunicationsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Division of Labor Standards Enforcement v. Dick Bullis, Inc.Appellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1977
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.