Legal Opinion

Williams v. Bullock Tractor Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1921No. L. A. No. 5583PublishedCited by 6 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtSloane, J.

This appeal is taken from a judgment for plaintiff to recover from defendant $1,280, with interest and costs, on account of money paid by plaintiff to defendant on a contract of purchase of a gasoline farm tractor, which contract was rescinded by plaintiff for failure of certain conditions and warranties of the contract.

The action was tried on an amended complaint and answer thereto. The amended complaint sets forth in general terms the agreement of the plaintiff to buy and of the defendant to sell a certain tractor, known as a “16-10 H. P. creeping grip gasoline tractor, complete, at and for…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. City of Pasadena v. StimsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Millar v. MillarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Shively v. Semi-Tropic Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Daggett v. GrayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Remsberg v. Hackney Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1917

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Morrow v. MorrowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  2. Fahey v. MaddenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
  3. Sanders v. TobermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Merchants Finance Co. v. Acosta Bros.California Court of Appeal · 1927
  5. Advance Rumely Thresher Co. v. McCoyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931

1 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