Legal Opinion

Popcorn Equipment Co. v. Page

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 16, 1949No. Civ. 17040PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilson, J.

Appeal from judgment confirming arbitration award.

Under contracts entered into in December, 1945, and February, 1946, appellants granted to respondent an exclusive license throughout the world excepting Canada to manufacture and sell popcorn machinery and equipment. Disagreements arose between the parties concerning the interpretation of the contracts and respondent asserted that appellants had violated the agreements by mating sales of licensed items without respondent’s knowledge. By a contract entered into in January, 1947, the parties agreed that if they could not arrive at an adjustment…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Pacific Vegetable Oil Corp. v. C.S.T., Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Wolfsen v. HathawayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Hammell v. BrittonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Utah Construction Co. v. Western Pacific Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Shapleigh v. MierSupreme Court of the United States · 1937

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Sapp v. BarenfeldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Griffith Co. v. San Diego College for WomenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Flores v. ArroyoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  4. Crofoot v. Blair Holdings Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1953
  5. Alisal Sanitary District v. KennedyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960

33 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