Legal Opinion

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Blade

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 29, 1956No. Civ. 20782PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.

By its complaint for money had and received plaintiff seeks to recover from defendant, who was its advertising manager, "kickbacks” that he had received from engravers and printers to whom he let such work on behalf of plaintiff. Judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff for $66,089.06. Defendant appeals.

Defendant contends that (1) the major portion of the items comprising the judgment was barred by the statute of limitations ; (2) the evidence is insufficient to establish the amount of such kickbacks from one of the engraving concerns; and (3) interest was computed on an erroneous basis in…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Dillard v. McKnightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Philpott v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Richter v. WalkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Pashley v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1944

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. v. East Bay Union of MacHinists, Local 1304California Court of Appeal · 1964
  2. UA Local 343 of the United Ass'n v. Nor-Cal Plumbing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
  3. William Waggoner v. Robert Lee DallaireCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
  4. Benson v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Sanders v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970

30 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