Legal Opinion

Schubert v. Reich

California Supreme Court

Decided October 31, 1950No. L. A. 21463PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCarter, J.

Plaintiff commenced an action with respect to a contract under which defendant was to grade and process dates owned by plaintiff. Defendant answered and cross-complained for compensation for grading work, and obtained a judgment for $7,287.16, and a declaration that he had a lien on the dates as security. Plaintiff’s motion for a new trial on the ground of accident and surprise was granted “on the condition that the plaintiff and cross-defendant pay to Clyde Thomas, attorney for the defendant and cross-complainant, the sum of $75.00 as attorney fees within 5 days.” Apparently the condition of…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. County of San Bernardino v. County of RiversideCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  2. In Re Estate of HubbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Preluzsky v. Pacific Co-Operative Cafeteria Co.California Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Storke v. StorkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Shaver v. TunsteadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. Gudelj v. GudeljCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  2. In Re Marriage of FonsteinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Frustuck v. City of FairfaxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  4. H. D. Arnaiz Ltd. v. County of San JoaquinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
  5. Mears v. MearsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960

40 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