Legal Opinion
Seibert v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 31, 1975No. Civ. 33020PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RATTIGAN, Acting P. J.
These five appeals are from judgments which concluded eleven separate actions commenced in the Superior Courts of Alameda County and the City and County of San Francisco. The defendant in each action is a major retail merchant whose practices in selling on installment credit are regulated by the Unruh Act (Civ. Code, div. 3, pt. 4, tit. 2, ch. 1 [“Retail Installments Sales”], commencing with § 1801.) Despite the multiple origins of the appeals, a principal question on each of them is whether the various defendants (respondents in this court) are complying with the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Sacramento Newspaper Guild, Local 92 v. Sacramento County Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Henderson v. FisherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Zachary v. R. H. Macy & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Johnson v. Sears Roebuck & Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1973
- Morgan v. Reasor Corp.California Supreme Court · 1968
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Haas v. Pittsburgh National BankCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
- E.C.A Environmental Management Services, Inc. v. ToenyesMontana Supreme Court · 1984
- California Chamber of Commerce v. State Air Resources BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Fox v. Federated Department Stores, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1979
- Joannou v. City of Rancho Palos VerdesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.