Legal Opinion
McIntyre v. Hicks
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 10, 1929No. Docket No. 5469PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BURNELL, J., pro tem.
This action was brought by the owner of a newspaper route to recover for advertising space in the “Los Angeles Times,” claimed to have-been purchased from him by the defendants. From a judgment for plaintiff one of the defendants, Mox, Incorporated, has taken this appeal.
There is no dispute as to the fact of publication of the advertisements or as to the amount of the bill therefor, but appellant contends that respondent was not an independent contractor, but a mere agent for “The Times,” and hence that not he but the publisher of the newspaper was the real party in…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Green v. SouleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Keyes v. NimsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Trout v. OgilvieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Shirai v. BlumNew York Court of Appeals · 1924
- Klockenbaum v. PiersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- J. E. Earnest & Co. v. WordTexas Commission of Appeals · 1941
- J. E. Earnest & Co. v. WordTexas Supreme Court · 1941
- Asamen v. ThompsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Slyter v. Clinton Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
- Walter J. Warren Insurance Agency v. Surpur Timber Co.California Court of Appeal · 1967
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.