Legal Opinion

Smith v. Bach

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 14, 1921No. Civ. No. 3645PublishedCited by 13 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

Action in assumpsit. Upon a trial of the case first had, a nonsuit was granted, followed by judgment against plaintiffs, which on appeal therefrom was reversed, to which decision (reported in 183 Cal. 259, [191 Pac. 14]) we refer for a full statement of the facts upon which the action is founded.

Upon a retrial, judgment was rendered in favor of defendant Bach, and for plaintiffs against Borgh, bnt for a less sum than the amount claimed by plaintiffs. Thereupon plaintiffs, insisting they were entitled to judgment against both defendants for the fnll sum of their claims, appealed. This judgment…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Smith v. BachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Smith v. BachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Pollak v. StauntonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Shortell v. Evans-Ferguson Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1929
  3. Davis v. Rite-Lite Sales Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
  4. White v. JacobsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  5. McClory v. DodgeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931

8 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