Legal Opinion
Hill & Morton, Inc. v. Coughlan
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 28, 1963No. Civ. 20933PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBray, P. J.
Defendant Coughlan, one of three defendants against whom judgment was rendered, appeals from said judgment. The other defendants have not appealed.
Question Presented
Was the agreement between Hill and North materially altered, thus exonerating Coughlan?
Record
October 31, 1956, plaintiff, a wholesale lumber dealer in Oakland, entered into a written agreement with defendant North Lumber, Ine. (hereinafter referred to as North), a retail lumber dealer in San Diego, defendant Sam Cohen individually and as president of North, and defendant Coughlan individually and as secretary of North, by which…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Meyer v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Berg Metals Corp. v. WilsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Somers v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.California Supreme Court · 1923
- Humphreys v. CraneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1855
- Peskin v. SquiresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Wiener v. Van WinkleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- American Guaranty Corp. v. StoodyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Verdugo Highlands, Inc. v. Security InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Wise v. ClapperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- L.A. Unified School Dist. v. Torres Construction Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.