Legal Opinion
Tenzer v. Superscope, Inc.
California Supreme Court
Decided July 25, 1985No. L.A. 31842PublishedCited by 124 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
GRODIN, J.
Plaintiff Michael L. Tenzer (Tenzer) appeals from a judgment in favor of defendant Superscope, Inc. (Superscope) after the trial court granted Superscope’s motion for summary judgment.
Facts
The facts, as revealed by Tenzer’s complaint 1 and the papers filed in support of and in opposition to the motion for summary judgment, are these:
Superscope is a corporation listed on the New York Stock Exchange and authorized to do business in California. Joseph Tushinsky is the president of the corporation, as well as the chairman of its board of directors.
Tenzer has been involved in a…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Pepper v. LittonSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- People v. AshleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Seymour v. OelrichsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Corwin v. Los Angeles Newspaper Service Bureau, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1971
- Monarco v. Lo GrecoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by124 opinions
- Lazar v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- Landes Construction Co., Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Royal Bank of Canada, Defendant-Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Texaco, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Claim-Defendant-Appellant v. William R. Ponsoldt, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Small v. Fritz Companies, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2003
- Diane MILLER and Pamela Lewis, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. FAIRCHILD INDUSTRIES, INC., a Maryland Corporation, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
119 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.