Legal Opinion

Fricker v. Uddo & Taormina Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided June 21, 1957No. L. A. 24479PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGibson, C. J.

Plaintiffs, claiming that they are the assignees of part of the proceeds of a tomato crop which George Kikuchi had agreed to grow and sell to defendant canning company, seek to recover the amount of a crop order given to them by Kikuchi and accepted by defendant. * Defendant has appealed from an adverse judgment contending that it is not supported by the evidence.

The case was submitted on stipulated facts which may be summarized as follows:

In March 1952 Kikuchi agreed to grow a tomato crop and to sell it to defendant. The contract provided that in the event defendant should advance moneys to…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Maguire v. Hibernia Savings & Loan SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Jones v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Floeck v. HooverNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1948
  4. McGill v. BaumgartWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  5. Peden Iron & Steel Co. v. McKnightCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1910

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. In Re TartarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  2. American Federation of Labor & Congress of Industrial Organizations v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  3. General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. KyleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
  4. California State Employees' Ass'n v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  5. Cleveland v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012

21 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