David & Son v. Hurgren & Anderson
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sonoma County and from orders denying a new trial, and denying a motion to strike out a cost bill. J. McMannon, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMcFARLAND, J.
This is an action, to recover of the defendants seven hundred and two dollars for the nonfulfillment by them of a contract to deliver to plaintiffs a certain amount of collar leather. The defendants by their answer deny the. averments of the complaint, and set up as a counterclaim that plaintiffs are indebted to them for goods, wares, and merchandise sold, et cetera, in the sum of three hundred dollars. The jury returned a verdict for defendants in the sum of one dollar. Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment, from an order denying their motion for a new trial, and from an order denying their…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Warden v. Mendocino CountyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
- Ury v. WildeThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1888
3Cited by15 opinions
- Lauren Casola v. Dexcom, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2024
- Hughes v. De MundCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- Checketts v. CollingsUtah Supreme Court · 1931
- Kientz v. HarrisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- Winchester v. BlackCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.