Hill v. Progress Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
KINCAID, J. pro tem.
Appeal is taken by o plaintiff from a judgment of nonsuit granted upon conclusion of plaintiff’s case at the trial. The complaint herein alleges, and it is admitted by failure to. deny, that the defendants Marc D. Leh and David E. Brown are partners doing business as The Progress Company, a copartnership, and that the defendant Joseph - F. Toland was employed by such defendants as the company superintendent. It is also alleged that the defendant Harry L. Berry is a motor truck operator, conducting his business under a written contract with the company. The Progress Company…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Johnson v. Union Furniture Co.California Court of Appeal · 1939
- Mitchell Camera Corp. v. Fox Film Corp.California Supreme Court · 1937
- Roddy v. Hill Packing Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1943
3Cited by15 opinions
- Don King Productions, Inc. v. DouglasDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1990
- Augustine v. TruccoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Dryden v. Tri-Valley GrowersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Bank of New York v. Fremont General Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Mariani Bartoli de Christian v. Christy GuenardSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1952
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.