Continental Car-Na-Var Corp. v. Moseley
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.
The plaintiff is an Indiana corporation engaged in the business of manufacturing, producing, buying and selling compounds for finishing, cleaning and treatment of floors and of tools and appliances for that purpose. It maintains an office in Los Angeles. Prom 1932 to March 31, 1941, defendant Moseley was the district manager for plaintiff under a written contract, which he terminated on the latter date. The defendant Franzus is a chemist who was employed by plaintiff in Indiana from September 1934 to July 1936. Thereafter until 1940 he was employed by GersonStewart Corporation, an Ohio…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Guggenhime & Co. v. LamantiaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- New Method Laundry Co. v. MacCannCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Pasadena Ice Co. v. ReederCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Colonial Laundries, Inc. v. HenrySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1927
- Boosing v. DormanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1912
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by95 opinions
- State Rubbish Collectors Ass'n v. SiliznoffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- California Shoppers, Inc. v. Royal Globe Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1985
- In Re PorterfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Nissho-Iwai Co., Ltd. v. Occidental Crude Sales, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1984
- Reeves v. HanlonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
90 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.