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
- Harmony v. . BinghamNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
- Tompkins v. . DudleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- School District No. 1 v. DauchySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857
- Pacific Factor Co. v. AdlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Patent Brick Co. v. MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- J. S. Potts Drug Co. v. BenedictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Mineral Park Land Co. v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Dyer Bros. I. Wks. v. Central I. Wks.California Supreme Court · 1920
- Dyer Bros. Golden W. Iron Works v. Cent. Iron WorksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Hanlon Drydock & Shipbuilding Co. v. G. W. McNear, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1924
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.