Samuels v. Ottinger
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. • Henry U. Brandenstein, Charles W. Slack, and Grover O'Connor, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.
The plaintiff appeals from a judgment in favor of the defendant. The judgment disposed of three separate actions, which, with the consent of the parties, had been consolidated for trial. The appeal is on the judgment-roll.
The actions were brought to recover installments of monthly rent accruing under a written lease of real property. The three proceedings differed only in the months for which rental was claimed.
A jury trial having been waived, the court made findings as follows: On December 20, 1906, D. Samuels Realty Company, a corporation, as lessor, leased to the defendants, as lessees, a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Sexton v. Chicago Storage Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1889
- Bonetti v. TreatCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Preble v. AbrahamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Consumers' Ice Co. v. William H. H. Bixler & Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1896
- Brosnan v. KramerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- California Lettuce Growers, Inc. v. Union Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
- Kendall v. Ernest Pestana, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1985
- Medico-Dental Building Co. v. Horton & ConverseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Peiser v. MettlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Realty & Rebuilding Co. v. ReaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.