Legal Opinion

Franklin v. Nat C. Goldstone Agency

California Supreme Court

Decided March 18, 1949No. L. A. 20524PublishedCited by 62 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.

This case involves the enforcement of an arbitration award in payment for certain painting work performed by interior decorators as part of their agreed services. The propriety of such recovery is challenged upon the ground that the decorators were not shown to be licensed contractors at the time of performance of the work in question. Such point of objection, tendering the issue of illegality in derogation of the right to judicial relief, is well taken, and the court’s order confirming the award cannot be sustained upon the record as it now stands.

Respondents, as interior decorators,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Loving & Evans v. BlickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Pacific Vegetable Oil Corp. v. C.S.T., Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1946
  3. Utah Construction Co. v. Western Pacific Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Gatti v. Highland Park Builders, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1946
  5. Wise v. RadisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925

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

3Cited by62 opinions

  1. Lewis & Queen v. N. M. Ball SonsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Loving & Evans v. BlickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Norwood v. JuddCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  4. People v. CarusoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Conderback, Inc. v. Standard Oil Co.California Court of Appeal · 1966

57 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