Legal Opinion

A. H. Busch Co. v. Strauss

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 31, 1930No. Docket No. 3971PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFinch, P. J.

While in possession of one of the rooms of a building as'the plaintiff’s tenant, the defendant Strauss sublet the room, with the plaintiff’s consent, to the defendant Connally. Thereafter, on January 13, 1925, the plaintiff served upon Strauss a notice reading as follows:

“Enclosed you will find copy of notice to pay rent or quit, served upon Mr. W. W. Connally, who was the last party to occupy 658 So. Vermont avenue. I am sending you this notice to call the matter to your attention inasmuch as you, by virtue of the consent to sublet which you and Mr. Connally signed, are jointly liable under…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Burke v. NortonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  2. Wickstrom v. McGrathCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
  3. Costello v. Martin BrothersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  4. Security Realty Co. v. KostCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Moskovitz v. LefrancoisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  2. Neuhaus v. NorgardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  3. Lehr v. CrosbyAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1981
  4. Stich v. GordonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. Daquioag v. EdwardSuperior Court of Guam · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API