Legal Opinion
Newmark v. H & H Products Manufacturing Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 8, 1954No. Civ. 20246PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMcCOMB, J.
From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, on defendants’ cross-eomplaint for fraud and conversion, defendants appeal.
Facts: On March 17, 1951, Artistic Beauty Products Company, hereinafter referred to as “Seller,” entered into a written agreement with defendants, hereinafter referred to as “Buyer,” whereby the Buyer agreed to purchase from the Seller certain machinery, fixtures, equipment and' tools for the sum of $90,000. The Buyer also agreed to pay the Seller for certain leasehold improvements the sum of $25,000. A complete itemized inventory of all the personal property purchased by the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Simmons v. California Institute of TechnologyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. PendergrassCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Ferguson v. KochCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Lobdell v. MillerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Cobbs v. CobbsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Continental Airlines, Inc. v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1989
- Abbot v. StevensCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- Vogelsang v. WolpertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Apolito v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1966
- Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. Lamb Finance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1960
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.