Legal Opinion

Williams v. Lowenthal

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 8, 1932No. Docket No. 727PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.

This action was instituted by plaintiff to recover the balance alleged to be due from defendant on account of the sale by plaintiff's assignor to defendant of a musical instrument known as an orchestrope. Defendant was the proprietor of a restaurant in the city of Fresno. The orehestrope was an electrically operated phonograph equipped with fifty-six phonograph records. It was so arranged that it would operate upon the deposit of five-cent coins in a receptacle provided for them. The instrument was sold under a conditional sales contract whereby defendant agreed to pay therefor the sum of…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Garvey v. LashellsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  2. Lee v. McClellandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Gamble v. TrippCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Union Oil Co. v. Purissima Hills Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
  5. H., R. McC. v. W., L. Co.California Court of Appeal · 1906

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hauter v. ZogartsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Autohaus, Inc. v. Aguilar, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1990
  3. McNeal v. GreenbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Breakers Holding Co. v. Josebra Co.California Court of Appeal · 1954
  5. Corbett v. OttsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962

2 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