Legal Opinion

Durfee v. Seale

California Supreme Court

Decided July 16, 1903No. S.F. No. 2513PublishedCited by 12 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtLorigan, J.

This action is brought for a balance upon an alleged contract, made in 1893, for breeding, training, feeding, and shoeing six brood mares, the property of the appellant, Thomas Seale. At the time of the contract, plaintiff, who resided at Los Angeles, owned a racing stallion known as “McKinney,” kept by him at that city for breeding purposes. The defendant, a resident of Santa Clara County, was the owner of six brood mares. An agreement was made between the plaintiff and the defendant, Thomas Seale, whereby said six brood mares were to be shipped to Los Angeles to be bred to said stallion,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. London & San Francisco Bank, Ltd. v. ParrottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Lawless v. CalawayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Millar v. MillarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  3. In Re Estate of HigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Moore v. MoffattCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Stanton v. CarnahanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API