Legal Opinion
Tustin Fruit Assn. v. Earl Fruit Co.
California Supreme Court
Decided June 27, 1898No. L. A. No. 330PublishedCited by 9 opinions
APPEAL from Superior Court, Orange County. Action by the Tustin Fruit Association against the Earl Fruit Company. From a judgment giving plaintiff partial relief and from orders denying a new trial both parties appeal. Affirmed.
1Opinion of the Court
BRITT, C.
There are cross-appeals in this case. The plaintiff’s action is founded on a written contract executed by and between the parties now litigant, of which the more material portions are as follows:
“This agreement, made and entered into at Tustin this eighteenth day of December, 1894, in duplicate, by and *40between the Tustin Fruit Association, a corporation, of Tustin, Orange county, California, party of the first part, and the Earl Fruit Company, a corporation, of Los Angeles, California, party of the second part, witnesseth: That the party of the first part hereby places all oranges…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Polhemus v. HeimanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
- Amestoy v. Elec. Rapid Transit Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
- Gould v. SteinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
- Alexander v. McDowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Hill v. McKayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- United Iron Works v. Outer Harbor Dock & Wharf Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
- Ore-Ida Potato Products, Inc. v. LarsenIdaho Supreme Court · 1961
- Earl Fruit Co. v. HermanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
- Allen v. ChatfieldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
- Standard Sewing Equipment Corp. v. Motor Specialty, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.