Blair v. Brownstone Oil & Refining Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. William H. Fuller, and Charles E. Putnam, for Appellant. Leonard B. Slosson, and George E. Farrand, for Respondents.
1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.
This ease went twice to the district court of appeal. On the first appeal (17 Cal. App. 472, [120 Pac. 41]) that court approved the finding of the superior court that Blair had been prevented from completing the contract to deepen one of the oil wells of the defendant corporation by reason of the latter’s failure to furnish the necessary materials for the proper prosecution of the work as provided in said agreement. The judgment was reversed, however, because there was no finding to the effect that the corporation had authorized the cancellation of the contract, although there was sufficient…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Blood v. La Serena Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Kellogg v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Fraser v. SheldonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Blair v. Brownstone Oil & Refining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1911
3Cited by5 opinions
- Blair v. Brownstone Oil & Refining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1917
- John Paul Lumber Co. v. AgnewCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- McCray v. Sapulpa Petroleum Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- San Roque Properties, Inc. v. PierceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
- Losie v. Royal Indemnity Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1918