Legal Opinion

Clark v. Compania Ganadera De Cananea, S. A.

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1963No. 7156PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JENNINGS, Justice.

We deem it necessary to enlarge upon the following novel problem, which we casually mentioned in the original opinion: Under the circumstances, were appellants required, at their peril, to include in the record the evidence, if any, adduced respecting a condition subsequent, a matter of defense, when the lower court directed a verdict at the end of their case on the ground of merger and in making the ruling used words which negatived any idea that he had considered the condition subsequent in making the decision?

The material facts are that appellants’ assignors allegedly…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Title Guaranty & Surety Co. v. NicholsSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  2. Cozby v. EdwardsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1947
  3. Supergear Drive Corp. v. Hollister-Whitney Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1945

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Graham v. AsburyArizona Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Ron Case Roofing & Asphalt Paving, Inc. v. BlomquistUtah Supreme Court · 1989
  3. Thunderbird Metallurgical Inc. v. Arizona Testing LaboratoriesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1967
  4. Goodman v. Physical Resource Engineering, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
  5. Correa v. Pecos Valley Development Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1980

20 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