Legal Opinion

W. H. Blodgett Co. v. Bebe Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided March 23, 1923No. S. F. No. 10175PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKerrigan, J.

The plaintiff brought this action to recover damages from the defendants for breach of contract, which was one for the sale and purchase of personal property. At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s evidence the defendants moved for a nonsuit upon the ground that the contract relied upon by the plaintiff provided that should any dispute arise thereunder it should be submitted to arbitration, and that the plaintiff’s evidence failed to show that such arbitration had been had or that plaintiff had offered to arbitrate. The trial court -granted the motion upon that ground and the plaintiff appeals…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. President of Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. v. Pennsylvania Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1872
  2. Farnum v. Phoenix InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Holmes v. RichetCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  4. Old Saucelito Land & Dry Dock Co. v. Commercial Union Assurance Co.California Supreme Court · 1884
  5. California Annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church v. SeitzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Moncharsh v. Heily & BlaseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State Highway Department v. MacDougald Construction Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1939
  3. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
  4. Pettus v. Olga Coal Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Trollope v. JeffriesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976

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

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

Powered by the Exa API