Legal Opinion

Hollywood Holding & Development Corp. v. Oswald

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 4, 1931No. Docket No. 4446PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JAMISON, J., pro tem.

This action was brought by plaintiff to recover from defendant, an undisclosed principal, the cost of certain street and curb improvements installed by plaintiff in connection with the sale to defendant of a certain tract of land owned by plaintiff, the sale being affected through M. E. Oswald, who acted as defendant’s agent, and through G. S. Chapin and E. 0. Earle, who acted as dummies in the transaction. Defendant being desirous of purchasing said tract, sent his brother, M. E. Oswald, to plaintiff to consummate the deal. Plaintiff refused to sell said tract to…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Davidson v. DallasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
  2. Geary Street, Park & Ocean Railroad v. RolphCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  3. Geo. K. Hubbard & Co. v. Tenbrook & BroSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
  4. Hulsman v. IrelandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Shirey v. All Night and Day BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Berns & Koppstein, Inc. v. Orion Insurance Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1959
  2. Rigney v. De La Salle InstituteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  3. Eamoe v. Big Bear Land & Water Co.California Court of Appeal · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API