Legal Opinion

Wilmington Transportation Co. v. O'Neil

California Supreme Court

Decided March 27, 1893No. 14872PublishedCited by 20 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County- The facts are stated in the opinion:

1Opinion of the Court

Van Clief, C.

—On November 3, 1890, the respondent-plaintiff (a corporation), as party of the first part, and the appellant-defendant, as party of the second part, executed the following agreement: —

“That the said party of the first part, for and in consideration of the covenants and agreements hereinafter mentioned *3to be kept and performed by said party of the second part, does covenant and agree unto the chartering and letting to hire of its coal lighter ‘ Wilmington/ her anchor and chain, unto the said party of the second part, for the term of one mouth from the date hereof; said lighter to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Harmony v. . BinghamNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
  2. Tompkins v. . DudleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
  3. School District No. 1 v. DauchySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857
  4. Pacific Factor Co. v. AdlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Patent Brick Co. v. MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. J. S. Potts Drug Co. v. BenedictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Mineral Park Land Co. v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Dyer Bros. I. Wks. v. Central I. Wks.California Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Dyer Bros. Golden W. Iron Works v. Cent. Iron WorksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Hanlon Drydock & Shipbuilding Co. v. G. W. McNear, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1924

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