Legal Opinion

California Chicks, Inc. v. Viebrock

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 22, 1967No. Civ. 741PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtConley, P. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment upholding an affirmative defense tried specially by order of the court in a bifurcated trial for damages for breach of contract. The trial court found the contract upon which plaintiff based its claim for damages, which called for the purchase of eggs, to be unenforceable upon the ground that plaintiff had no farm produce dealer’s license. (Agr. Code, § 1263.)

Plaintiff, who was in the business of purchasing chicken eggs, hatching them, and selling one-day-old chicks, entered into a contract with defendant, a poultry breeder and dealer in eggs, for the…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Lewis & Queen v. N. M. Ball SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Berka v. WoodwardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Smith v. BachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Levinson v. BoasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Severance v. Knight-Counihan Co.California Supreme Court · 1947

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Southfield v. BarrettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  2. Wilson v. SteeleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
  3. George Foreman Associates, Ltd. v. ForemanDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1974
  4. Al-Ibrahim v. EddeDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1995
  5. California Chicks, Inc. v. ViebrockCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967

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