Legal Opinion
McKee v. Mires
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 25, 1952No. Civ. 8067PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SCHOTTKY, J. pro tem.
Plaintiff brought this action to recover the value of petroleum products delivered, and used by a gold mining dredge operated in Trinity County. The action was against the defendants individually, and against the defendants doing business as Crescent Gold Dredging Company, a copartnership. The complaint set forth three causes. The first count alleged an oral contract to pay plaintiff the reasonable value of gas, oil, and Diesel fuel delivered by him to defendants, and that there remained unpaid the sum of $1,236.08. The second cause was a common count upon a “mutual, open…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lee v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Carman v. AthearnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Stoops v. PistachioCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- Gerlinger Foundry & MacHine Works, Inc. v. Crescent Gold Dredging Co.California Court of Appeal · 1951
3Cited by6 opinions
- Pacific Atlantic Wine, Inc. v. DucciniCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Crabbe v. MiresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- People Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. VallejosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Belmont v. BelmontCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- McNichols v. Nelson Valley Building Co.California Court of Appeal · 1953
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.