Legal Opinion
Kersch v. Taber
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 11, 1945No. Civ. 7100PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
The plaintiff brought suit in assumpsit for repayment of $1,500 advanced to defendants upon a written contract to purchase from the owners a specified mining claim in Siskiyou County. The contract provided that said money was to be used for the “purchase of said mine and for no other purpose whatsoever.” The contract contained no specific limitation of time within which the mine was to be purchased. After the lapse of nearly fourteen months, during which time the defendants made no effort to acquire title to the mine, and after notice of said breach of contract, this suit was commenced. The…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Waterman v. BanksSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Spier v. LangCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Skookum Oil Co. v. ThomasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Roberts v. EvansCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- Smith v. GroveCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- People v. ParkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Constans v. RossCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Holmes v. LernerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Smalley v. BakerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Denning v. TaberCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.