Legal Opinion
Zinn v. Fred R. Bright Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 9, 1969No. Civ. 9309PublishedCited by 41 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AULT, J. pro tem. *
By amended complaint, the plaintiff, as administrator of the estate of Charles Kano, deceased, sued to recover the sum of $3,045.73 from the defendant Fred B. Bright Company, Inc. The amended complaint is in two causes of action, each in the form of a common count. The first count is framed as an account stated; the second seeks recovery on an open book account. After trial, the court found for the plaintiff on both counts and judgment was entered against the defendant in the amount prayed for in the complaint. From this judgment the defendant appeals.
The record reveals…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. v. East Bay Union of MacHinists, Local 1304California Court of Appeal · 1964
- Wilbur v. WilburCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Bennett v. PotterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Brownrigg v. DefreesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Shapiro v. Equitable Life Assurance SocietyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Davis & Cox, a Partnership, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Summa Corporation, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee. Chester C. Davis, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Summa Corporation, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee. Summa Corporation, Defendant-Counterclaimant/appellant v. Davis & Cox, a Partnership, Chester C. Davis, Maxwell E. Cox, Howard M. Jaffe and Martin Cook, Plaintiffs-Counterdefendants/appellees. Summa Corporation, Hughes Aircraft Corporation, Defendants- Counterclaimants/appellants v. Chester C. Davis, Davis & Cox, Maxwell E. Cox, Howard M. Jaffe and D. Martin Cook, Counterdefendants/appelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Cox v. Summa Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Canal-Randolph Anaheim, Inc. v. WilkoskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Professional Collection Consultants v. LauronCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Luxul Technology Inc. v. Nectarlux, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2015
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.