Legal Opinion

D. A. Parrish & Sons v. County Sanitation District Number 4

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 13, 1959No. Civ. 18228PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTobriner, J.

We find no merit in appellant’s claim of error in the trial court’s- award to a contractor of damages for breach of contract covering installation of sewer pipe, upon any of the three suggested grounds: that the evidence does not support the judgment, that two subcontractors should not have been joined as plaintiffs, and that the findings and judgment should have been in the form urged by appellant.

The case arises from breach of contract. Respondent contracted to install main and lateral sewer pipe; appellant in turn promised to provide rights of way upon which the work was to be done. Indeed…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Miller v. McKinnonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Ambassador Petroleum Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Milovich v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  4. Culjak v. Better Built Homes, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1943
  5. Kersch v. TaberCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. People v. LopezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Interstate Contracting Corp. v. City of DallasTexas Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Howard Contracting, Inc. v. G.A. MacDonald Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1999
  4. Alamo Community College District v. Browning Construction Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2004
  5. Ace Stone, Inc. v. Township of WayneSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1966

17 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