Burr v. Gardella
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
The plaintiff, in the month of June, 1914, entered into a contract with the state of California, through and by its department of engineering, whereby the former agreed to construct a portion of a state highway in Butte County, “between Lindo Channel, one and one-half miles north of Chico, and the northerly county boundary—Division 3, Route 3, Section D.” On the fifteenth day of April, 1915, the plaintiff and the defendant Keith made and entered into a written agreement, by the terms of which said Keith, for a certain specified consideration, was to haul and transport or carry from Cana or…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- French v. PowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- People v. NewcomerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Associated Oil Co. v. Commary-Peterson Co.California Court of Appeal · 1917
- State v. HornerOregon Supreme Court · 1900
- Matteson v. Equitable Mining & Milling Co.California Supreme Court · 1904
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- B.K.K. Co. v. SchultzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- Corporation of President of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1939
- California Electric Supply Co. v. United Pacific Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Pacific Coast Engineering Co. v. Detroit Fidelity & Surety Co.California Supreme Court · 1931
- Excavating Equipment Dealers, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.California Court of Appeal · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.