Thomas v. Fursman
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. Daniel G. Deasy, Judge. Affirmed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
BEASLY, J., pro tem.
This is an appeal from a judgment entered on a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and against the appellants, namely: W. Huff, E. Thompson, H. A. Baker and Charles L; Chandler, administrator. The action was commenced on the second day of July, 1913, by M. A. Varney, as plaintiff. Mr. Varney died in Los Angeles on the fifteenth day of March, 1914, and afterward, on the eighteenth day of May, 1914, Floyd C. Thomas was substituted as plaintiff, the cause of action having been assigned to said Thomas.
The action was prosecuted for a balance of $3,670 alleged to be due for the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Spreckels v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Melone v. RuffinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Hunt v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
- Browning v. McNearCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
- Miller & Lux, Inc. v. DunlapCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Wood v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1974
- Cassetta v. BaimaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Crawford v. MeadowsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Delfelder v. Farmers' State Bank of RivertonWyoming Supreme Court · 1928
- Fairbanks v. Crump Irrigation & Supply Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.