Durbin v. Hillman
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
PREWETT, P. J., pro tem.
The defendant brings this appeal from a judgment rendered against him for the purchase price of personal property at a price in excess of two hundred dollars. The contract was in writing and the actual purchase was effected through the medium of an agent. The authority of this agent was wholly oral. The defendant did not accept any part of the purchased property nor pay any part of the purchase price. He repudiates the sale and disclaims any authority in the agent to represent him. At no time until the hearing on this appeal has he based his action upon the absence of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Feeney v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Nunez v. MorganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Balfour & Garrette v. WorleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
- Marshall v. FergusonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- Lane v. GluckaufCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- People v. IsbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- People v. KrupaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- State v. GainesWashington Supreme Court · 1927
- Clark Equipment Co. v. WheatCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- Howard v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.