Legal Opinion

C. Robert Nattress & Associates v. Cidco

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 6, 1986No. E001700PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KAUFMAN, J.

Defendants John Michels, Raymond Magnon, Charles Sutherland and CIDCO appeal from a judgment of specific performance in favor of plaintiffs C. Robert Nattress & Associates and C. Robert Nattress as an individual. The judgment ordered defendants CIDCO and Sutherland to sell to plaintiffs a commercial building in the City of Riverside pursuant to an agreement for purchase and sale of the building that was expressly made subject to a right of first refusal held by defendant Michels, the building’s principal tenant. The judgment also required defendants Michels and Magnon, who…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. King v. StanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Mott v. ClineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Canal-Randolph Anaheim, Inc. v. WilkoskiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
  4. Palo Alto Town & Country Village, Inc. v. Bbtc CompanyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Buckmaster v. BertramCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Gaggero v. YuraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  2. Foster v. HanniAlaska Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Pellandini v. ValadaoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  4. BEHNIWAL v. MixCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
  5. Ninety Nine Investment, Ltd. v. Overseas Courier ServiceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003

15 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