Hartung v. Pollastrini
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, P. J.
Dino Pollastrini, Ales Maul, Maul and Pollastrini, a partnership, and Harrison Wiggins appeal from the judgment against them upon the plaintiffs’ complaint and upon their cross-complaints.
The Hartungs, the respondents, own a ranch in Merced County, comprising 220 acres of land. They entered into an oral agreement with the partnership, Maul and Pollastrini. The trial court made findings concerning the contract which include the following: Maul, Pollastrini, and the partnership, all referred to hereafter as Pollastrini, agreed to prepare the Hartungs’ land so that it could be irrigated; to sow…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wilkinson & Co. v. McKinleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
3Cited by4 opinions
- WF Holt Co. v. a & E Elec. Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1983
- Gridley v. Department of Mental HygieneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
- Gridley v. Department of Mental HygieneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
- United Medical Devices v. PlaySafe CA2/3California Court of Appeal · 2015