Legal Opinion

Ross v. Thirlwall

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 22, 1929No. Docket No. 10PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, J.

This was an action originally brought by the plaintiffs as assignees of one W. C. Gilman to recover a balance of the purchase price of certain hogs, alleged to have been sold by Gilman to defendant. To the complaint the defendant filed an answer and counterclaim based upon allegations that the hogs sold him by Gilman were infected with cholera. He also filed a cross-complaint against the plaintiffs and the said Gilman, based upon damages, alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the communication of cholera from the hogs so purchased to other hogs already owned by him.

When the case was…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Sheldon v. LandwehrCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Jaffe v. LilienthalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Beckman v. WatersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Morehouse v. MorehouseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  5. Marcucci v. VowinckelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Capital National Bank v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  2. County of San Bernardino v. Doria Mining & Engineering Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1977
  3. Muller v. TannerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  4. Horstmyer v. Trial BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  5. Canal Oil Co. v. National Oil Co.California Court of Appeal · 1937

7 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