Sanford v. E. RiverSide Irrigation Dist.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Searls, C.
Action to recover for work and labor in sinking a well, and damages for violation of a contract.
*276Plaintiff had judgment for $2,300.35 and costs, from which judgment and an order denying a motion for a new trial defendant appeals.
There are two counts in the complaint, in each of which the same contract is set out. One is to recover for services rendered under such contract, the other to recover damages on account of defendant’s refusal to comply with the terms of the contract, and to permit plaintiff’s assignors to prosecute work thereunder.
On the twelfth day of November, 1891, the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Steelduct Co. v. Henger-Seltzer Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
- Hacker Pipe & Supply Co. v. Chapman Valve Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1936
- Berge v. International Harvester Co.California Court of Appeal · 1983
- Schiffman v. Peerless Motor Car Co.California Court of Appeal · 1910
- Fallis v. Julian Petroleum Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.