Eamoe v. Big Bear Land & Water Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtWhite, P. J.
This is an appeal from a judgment of nonsuit in a jury trial. It was alleged in the complaint “for fraud and negligent representations” that defendants Edgar Blaekshaw and Vic Lichtig, as agents for defendant Big Bear Land and Water Company, showed to plaintiff a parcel of land and stated that it was described as Lots 2 and 3 of Block 164; that plaintiff, relying upon such representation, signed an agreement to purchase said parcel; that plaintiff was informed he could immediately commence the erection of a house on the parcel, and plaintiff did so; that after plaintiff had expended $2,000…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Rothstein v. Janss Investment Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1941
- Herzog v. Capital Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
- Speck v. WylieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Hollywood Holding & Development Corp. v. OswaldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
3Cited by7 opinions
- Pasadena Medi-Center Associates v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Crawford v. NastosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Danzig v. Jack Grynberg & AssociatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Warshauer v. Bauer Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1960
- Unilab Corp. v. Angeles-IPA CA2/4California Court of Appeal · 2016
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.