Hobbs v. Davis
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. J. W. McKinley, H. L. McNair, Thomas Bryant, and Nye & Malburn, for Appellant. Hunsaker & Britt, C. J. Willett, and N. P. Moerdyke, for Respondents.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
A rehearing of this case on appeal was ordered so that we might further examine the opinion of the district court of appeal. Some of the members of this court thought that the conduct of the vendor in preventing the vendee from examining the mine amounted to a violation of the agreement, upon the principle that written into every contract is the stipulation that the vendee may have all of his lawful rights and may exercise them in relation to the subject matter of the agreement. A further study of the case and of the opinion of the learned district court of appeal of the second…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Cheney v. LibbySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Hobbs v. Tom Reed Gold Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
- Antonelle v. Kennedy & Shaw Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
- Griffith v. HappersbergerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Kaiser v. BarronCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Jacklich v. BaerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943