Legal Opinion

Watson v. Borcovich

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 19, 1939No. Civ. No. 11049PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOOLING, J., pro tem.

Appellant filed an unverified complaint for money alleged to be due for work, labor and services performed for respondents at their special instance and request. The answer was a general denial and after trial without a jury judgment went for defendants.

Prom the evidence of respondent Axis and the witness Sans the trial court was justified in concluding that the work was done under a share-cropping agreement. This issue was properly presented by the general denial and the showing that appellant was a share-cropper was a defense to his action for work and labor. (Cull v.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cull v. San Francisco & Fresno Land Co.California Supreme Court · 1899
  2. De Acosta v. De AcostaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Golde v. FoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
  2. May v. MayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API