Legal Opinion

Haase v. Cardoza

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 10, 1958No. Civ. 9544PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WARNE, J. pro tem. *

Appellant brought this action to recover the sum of $10,000 from respondent as a result of an alleged oral promise made by respondent to and with her deceased husband to pay appellant said sum and also to recover the further sum of $3,000, upon an assigned claim, based upon an alleged oral promise made by respondent to and with her deceased husband to pay to Loretta M. Haase the sum of $3,000. At the close of the appellant’s case in chief the trial court granted respondent’s motion for a nonsuit and this appeal followed.

It is stated in Lashley v. Koerber. 26 Cal.2d 83, 84…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Lashley v. KoerberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Singer v. MarxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  3. McConnell v. Bible InstituteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Rask v. NormanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1918

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wilson v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Gregory v. HardyCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1974
  3. Leonard v. GallagherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  4. Haase v. GibsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  5. Haase v. GibsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960

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