Legal Opinion

Lawrence v. Ducommun

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 2, 1936No. Civ. 9969PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROTH, J., pro tem.

Appellant is the administrator of the estate of George A. V. Smith, deceased. Appellant was substituted in this action as plaintiff, the case having been originally filed by Smith, who died thereafter. For purposes of convenience, however, plaintiff and appellant will be sometimes referred to as Smith. As a result of a contract executed on May 29, 1931, Smith obtained from the defendant, in addition to other consideration, four several promissory notes of $12,500 each, in return for the exclusive rights in the United States (except the state of Oregon) to an invention of a…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Clark v. McClurgCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Cal. Farm & Fruit Co. v. Schiappa-PietraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Kelley v. OwensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Zeller v. MilliganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
  5. King v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Carruth v. FritchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Stegeman v. VandeventerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  3. Malinow v. DorenbaumCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  4. Landreth v. DucommunCalifornia Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Morton v. FossCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

2 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