Seeburg v. El Royale Corp.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
SHAW, J. pro tem.
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of nonsuit rendered against him. On the 27th day of March, 1940, the defendant, being then the owner of a certain apartment house, entered into an agreement with plaintiff whereby it granted to him the “sole and exclusive right and option to purchase” that apartment house, for a price and on terms and conditions therein set forth. Plaintiff paid defendant for this option the sum of $5,000, which was not to be a part of the price if the option should be exercised. The option ran to and including April 27, 1940, and in order to exercise it…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Smith v. BanghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Peoples Street Ry. Co. v. SpencerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Rockland-Rockport Lime Co. v. . LearyNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
- Joyce v. ShaferCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Burks v. DaviesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Palo Alto Town & Country Village, Inc. v. Bbtc CompanyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Warner Bros. Pictures v. BrodelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Dawson v. GoffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Claremont Terrace Homeowners' Ass'n v. United StatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
- Caras v. ParkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.