Legal Opinion

C & K ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS v. Amber Steel Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1978No. S.F. 23837PublishedCited by 101 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*5Opinion

RICHARDSON, J.

The issue posed by this case is whether or not defendant was improperly denied its constitutional right to a jury trial. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 16.) We will conclude that because plaintiff’s suit for damages for breach of contract was based entirely upon the equitable doctrine of promissory estoppel (see Drennan v. Star Paving Co. (1958) 51 Cal.2d 409 [333 P.2d 757]), the gist of the action must be deemed equitable in nature and, under well established principles, neither party was entitled to a jury trial as a matter of right.

Plaintiff, a general contractor, solicited…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Seymour v. OelrichsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Abbott v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  3. People v. One 1941 Chevrolet CoupeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Drennan v. Star Paving Co.California Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Raedeke v. Gibraltar Savings & Loan Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974

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

3Cited by101 opinions

  1. Nwosu v. UbaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
  2. Benach v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  3. Pens. Plan Guide P 23921b Gleniss S. Schonholz v. Long Island Jewish Medical CenterCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
  4. Wilson v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation AuthorityCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Merex A.G. Merex Corporation and Peter C. Lachmann v. Fairchild Weston Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994

96 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