Williams v. Hawkins
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order denying a new trial. John W. Shenk, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtJames, J.
Appeal by defendant Eager from an order denying his motion, for a new trial after adverse judgment had been rendered.
The plaintiff is the assignee of one Staub, who was lessor named in a lease by which certain premises in the city of Los Angeles were let for a term commencing on the first day of November, 1907, and ending on the thirty-first day of December, 1911, with option given to the lessees to renew for a further period. The latter option was not taken advantage of. The lease contained this term: “It is hereby covenanted and agreed that said lessees may let or underlet the said demised…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bradbury v. HigginsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. CarsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1897
- Respini v. PortaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Koehler v. Holt Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
- Reed v. CrossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Borland v. BorlandCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- Security Trust & Savings Bank v. ClaussenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
- Glockner v. Palace Amusement Co.California Court of Appeal · 1920