Legal Opinion

Erwin v. Cee-Tee Construction Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 25, 1952No. Civ. 4440PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGriffin, J.

At the time of the filing of the complaint in this action for damages for breach of a contract and for ‘damage to his credit rating and business reputation,” claimed due under the first count, and for money claimed to be due under the second count, upon an account stated, plaintiff’s residence and principal place of business was in the county of San Bernardino. The individual defendants lived in Los Angeles County and had their principal place of business in that county. Plaintiff, together with defendant corporations Gee-Tee Construction Company, Consumers Transportation Corporation,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Brady v. Times-Mirror Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Goossen v. CliftonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  3. Gas Appliance Sales Co. v. W. B. Bastian Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1927
  4. Crofts & Anderson v. JohnsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  5. Gilman v. NordinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Ward Manufacturing Co. v. MileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  2. Pacific Bal Industries v. Northern Timber, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1953
  3. Marchese Bros. v. A. Lyon & SonsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  4. Peterson Tractor Co. v. MullerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  5. Garrett v. Superior Court of Kings Cty.California Court of Appeal · 1967

1 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