Legal Opinion

Pitino-Capasso Fruit Co. v. Hillside Packing Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 16, 1928No. Docket No. 3436PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BUCK (G. F.), J., pro tem.

This is an action by a vendee against his vendor to recover damages alleged to have been sustained for a breach of an alleged contract of sale. Defendant had judgment and plaintiff appeals from the judgment and also from the order denying plaintiff’s motion to vacate the judgment under the provisions of section 663 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Respondent urges in his reply brief a preliminary objection to the hearing of these appeals upon the ground that this court has acquired no jurisdiction to consider them. To this contention appellant makes no reply either by…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Aspegren Co., Inc. v. Sherman, Swan Co.California Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Kline v. MurrayMontana Supreme Court · 1927
  3. In re Estate of ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Modoc Co-Operative Assn. v. PorterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1909
  5. Smith v. QuestaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ryan v. RosenfeldCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
  2. Walsh v. Maurice Mercantile Co.California Court of Appeal · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API